<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="fedregister.xsl"?>
<FEDREG xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="FRMergedXML.xsd">
    <VOL>85</VOL>
    <NO>112</NO>
    <DATE>Wednesday, June 10, 2020</DATE>
    <UNITNAME>Contents</UNITNAME>
    <CNTNTS>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>
                Agency Health
                <PRTPAGE P="iii"/>
            </EAR>
            <HD>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35425-35428</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12513</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12565</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>AIRFORCE</EAR>
            <HD>Air Force Department</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Intent To Grant an Exclusive Patent License, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35418-35419</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12393</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Consumer Financial Protection</EAR>
            <HD>Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35417</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12508</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Children</EAR>
            <HD>Children and Families Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Intent To Award 35 Operating Division-Initiated Supplements for Grantees Under the Direct Services for Survivors of Torture Program, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35429-35430</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12564</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Civil Rights</EAR>
            <HD>Civil Rights Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Meetings:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>California Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35412</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12574</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Georgia Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35412-35413</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12531</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>New Mexico Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35413</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12532</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>North Dakota Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35413-35414</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12576</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Coast Guard</EAR>
            <HD>Coast Guard</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <SJ>Special Local Regulation:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Choptank River, Hambrooks Bay, Cambridge, MD, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35404</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12581</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Commerce</EAR>
            <HD>Commerce Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>International Trade Administration</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</P>
            </SEE>
            <CAT>
                <HD>RULES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Classification, De-Classification, and Public Availability of National Security Information, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35374-35376</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-10248</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Comptroller</EAR>
            <HD>Comptroller of the Currency</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>RULES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Director, Shareholder, and Member Meetings; Technical Correction, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35373-35374</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12570</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Corporation</EAR>
            <HD>Corporation for National and Community Service</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>President's Volunteer Service Awards, Parts A, B, C, D, and E, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35417-35418</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12526</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Defense Department</EAR>
            <HD>Defense Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Air Force Department</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Education Department</EAR>
            <HD>Education Department</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Comprehensive Literacy Program Evaluation: Comprehensive Literacy State Development Program Evaluation, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35419-35420</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12502</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Energy Department</EAR>
            <HD>Energy Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</P>
            </SEE>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <SJ>Energy Conservation Program:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Energy Conservation Standards for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Early Assessment Review; Refrigerated Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35394-35398</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12437</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35383-35394</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12438</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Test Procedures for Consumer Water Heaters and Residential-Duty Commercial Water Heaters, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35382-35383</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12436</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Environmental Protection</EAR>
            <HD>Environmental Protection Agency</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>RULES</HD>
                <SJ>Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Wisconsin; Redesignation of the Newport State Park Area in Door County to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35377-35379</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-10569</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Public Water System Supervision Program Approval:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Michigan, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35423</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12539</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Federal Aviation</EAR>
            <HD>Federal Aviation Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Petition for Exemption; Summary:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Airlines for America, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35494-35495</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12507</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>The Boeing Company, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35495-35496</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12506</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Federal Communications</EAR>
            <HD>Federal Communications Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35405-35406</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12417</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Implementing the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35406-35411</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-10896</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Meetings; Sunshine Act, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35423-35424</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12633</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Federal Energy</EAR>
            <HD>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Application:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Central Kentucky Transmission Co., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35421-35422</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12577</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Combined Filings, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35420-35421</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12543</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12544</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
                <SJ>Filing:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Edison Electric Institute; American Gas Association; Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35420-35421</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12578</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJ>Meetings:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Shell Energy North America (US), L. P.; Teleconference, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35420</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12579</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Federal Motor</EAR>
            <HD>Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Commercial Driver's License Skills Testing Delays Annual Survey, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35496-35497</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12567</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>
                Federal Railroad
                <PRTPAGE P="iv"/>
            </EAR>
            <HD>Federal Railroad Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Funding Opportunity:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35497-35507</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12542</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Financial Crimes</EAR>
            <HD>Financial Crimes Enforcement Network</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35507-35508</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12540</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Fish</EAR>
            <HD>Fish and Wildlife Service</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <SJ>Endangered and Threatened Species:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Designation of Critical Habitat for Florida Bonneted Bat, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35510-35544</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-10840</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>General Services</EAR>
            <HD>General Services Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Improving Customer Experience, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35424-35425</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12560</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Health and Human</EAR>
            <HD>Health and Human Services Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Children and Families Administration</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Homeland</EAR>
            <HD>Homeland Security Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Coast Guard</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>U.S. Customs and Border Protection</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Interior</EAR>
            <HD>Interior Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Fish and Wildlife Service</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>National Park Service</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Ocean Energy Management Bureau</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Internal Revenue</EAR>
            <HD>Internal Revenue Service</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Certain Medical Care Arrangements, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35398-35404</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12213</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>International Trade Adm</EAR>
            <HD>International Trade Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Mattresses From the People's Republic of China, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35415</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12562</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Monosodium Glutamate From the People's Republic of China, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35414</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12563</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJ>Binational Panel Review:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>North American Free Trade Agreement Final Panel Decision and Order, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35415</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12511</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>International Trade Com</EAR>
            <HD>International Trade Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Complaint:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Certain Completion Drill Bits and Products Containing the Same, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35441-35442</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12557</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJ>Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35442</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12512</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>NASA</EAR>
            <HD>National Aeronautics and Space Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Meetings:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>NASA Astrophysics Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35442-35443</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12534</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>National Credit</EAR>
            <HD>National Credit Union Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35443-35444</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12569</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Designation of Low Income Status, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35443</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12568</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>National Oceanic</EAR>
            <HD>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>RULES</HD>
                <SJ>Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Pollock in the Herring Savings Areas of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35381</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12566</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJ>International Fisheries:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Procedures for the Active and Inactive Vessel Register, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35379-35381</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-10268</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Application:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Marine Mammals; File No. 21585, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35415-35416</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12497</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Marine Mammals; File No. 23923, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35416-35417</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12496</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>National Park</EAR>
            <HD>National Park Service</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Federal Bureau of Investigation, Art Theft Program, Washington, DC, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35430-35431</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12548</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>John Michael Kohler Arts Center, Sheboygan, WI, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35438</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12546</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Minnesota Museum of American Art, St. Paul, MN, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35439</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12547</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35434-35435</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12556</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJ>Inventory Completion:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA, and Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35437-35438</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12551</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35431-35432</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12555</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35432-35433</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12552</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>History Colorado, Formerly Colorado Historical Society, Denver, CO, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35436-35437</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12554</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35433-35434</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12549</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>The Florida Department of State/Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee, FL, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35439-35440</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12553</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, Chapel Hill, NC, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35435-35436</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12550</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Neighborhood</EAR>
            <HD>Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Meetings; Sunshine Act, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35444-35445</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12611</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Ocean Energy Management</EAR>
            <HD>Ocean Energy Management Bureau</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Extension of Post-Sale Evaluation Period for Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale 254, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35440-35441</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12527</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Pension Benefit</EAR>
            <HD>Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Liability for Termination of Single-Employer Plans, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35445</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12510</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Postal Regulatory</EAR>
            <HD>Postal Regulatory Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>New Postal Products, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35445-35446</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12558</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>
                Postal Service
                <PRTPAGE P="v"/>
            </EAR>
            <HD>Postal Service</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>PROPOSED RULES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Semipostal Stamp Program, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35404-35405</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12412</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Securities</EAR>
            <HD>Securities and Exchange Commission</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>BOX Exchange, LLC, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35458-35459, 35473</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12522</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12523</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35467-35473</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12518</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35490-35492</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12517</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35461-35467, 35488-35490</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12521</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12524</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35454-35457, 35482-35488</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12514</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12525</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Nasdaq BX, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35453-35454</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12516</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>NYSE American, LLC, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35457-35458</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12520</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>NYSE Arca, Inc., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35459-35460</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12515</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>The Options Clearing Corp., </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35446-35453, 35474-35482</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12500</FRDOCBP>
                      
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12519</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>State Department</EAR>
            <HD>State Department</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>RULES</HD>
                <SJ>International Traffic in Arms Regulations:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Temporary Suspension, Modification, or Exception to Regulations During SARS-COV2 Public Health Emergency; Request for Comment, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35376-35377</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12580</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>Passport Demand Forecasting Survey, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35492-35493</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12545</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Surface Transportation</EAR>
            <HD>Surface Transportation Board</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Abandonment Exemption:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>City of Yelm in Thurston and Pierce Counties, WA, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35493-35494</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12504</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Indexing the Annual Operating Revenues of Railroads, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35494</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12501</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Transportation Department</EAR>
            <HD>Transportation Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Federal Aviation Administration</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Federal Railroad Administration</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Treasury</EAR>
            <HD>Treasury Department</HD>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Comptroller of the Currency</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Financial Crimes Enforcement Network</P>
            </SEE>
            <SEE>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">See</HD>
                <P>Internal Revenue Service</P>
            </SEE>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>DFC</EAR>
            <HD>U S International Development Finance Corporation</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <DOCENT>
                    <DOC>Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, </DOC>
                    <PGS>35418</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12533</FRDOCBP>
                </DOCENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <AGCY>
            <EAR>Customs</EAR>
            <HD>U.S. Customs and Border Protection</HD>
            <CAT>
                <HD>NOTICES</HD>
                <SJ>Request for Applicants for Appointment:</SJ>
                <SJDENT>
                    <SJDOC>User Fee Advisory Committee, </SJDOC>
                    <PGS>35430</PGS>
                    <FRDOCBP>2020-12509</FRDOCBP>
                </SJDENT>
            </CAT>
        </AGCY>
        <PTS>
            <HD SOURCE="HED">Separate Parts In This Issue</HD>
            <HD>Part II</HD>
            <DOCENT>
                <DOC>Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, </DOC>
                <PGS>35510-35544</PGS>
                <FRDOCBP>2020-10840</FRDOCBP>
            </DOCENT>
        </PTS>
        <AIDS>
            <HD SOURCE="HED">Reader Aids</HD>
            <P>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.</P>
            <P>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.</P>
        </AIDS>
    </CNTNTS>
    <VOL>85</VOL>
    <NO>112</NO>
    <DATE>Wednesday, June 10, 2020</DATE>
    <UNITNAME>Rules and Regulations</UNITNAME>
    <RULES>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35373"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="F">DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Office of the Comptroller of the Currency</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>12 CFR Part 7</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. OCC-2020-0020]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 1557-AE94</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Director, Shareholder, and Member Meetings: Technical Correction</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury (OCC).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Correcting amendment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        On May 28, 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         an interim final rule to revise its regulations on activities and operations of national banks and corporate activities of Federal savings associations to provide that these institutions may permit telephonic and electronic participation at all board of directors, shareholder, and as applicable, member, meetings. This correcting amendment makes a correction to those interim regulations.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The effective date is June 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Heidi M. Thomas, Special Counsel, Chief Counsel's Office, (202) 649-5490, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Background and Description of Correcting Amendment</HD>
                <P>
                    On May 28, 2020, the OCC published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     an interim final rule to revise its regulations on activities and operations of national banks and corporate activities of Federal savings associations to provide that these institutions may permit telephonic and electronic participation at all board of directors, shareholder, and as applicable, member, meetings. This correcting amendment makes a correction to those interim regulations. The interim final rule removed and reserved 12 CFR 7.1001.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     This correcting amendment reinserts this section and removes and reserves 12 CFR 7.2001, as was intended by the OCC and described in the preamble to the interim final rule.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         85 FR 31943.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Administrative Law Matters</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Administrative Procedure Act</HD>
                <P>
                    The OCC is issuing this correcting amendment without prior notice and the opportunity for public comment and the delayed effective date ordinarily prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Pursuant to section 553(b)(B) of the APA, general notice and the opportunity for public comment are not required with respect to a rulemaking when an “agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 553.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The OCC finds that public notice and comment are unnecessary because this correcting amendment makes a technical change to correct an erroneous removal in the interim final rule. Therefore, the OCC believes it has good cause to dispense with the APA prior notice and public comment process.</P>
                <P>
                    The APA also requires a 30-day delayed effective date, except for: (1) Substantive rules which grant or recognize an exemption or relieve a restriction; (2) interpretative rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As described above, the OCC believes it has good cause to issue this correcting amendment without a delayed effective date. Therefore, this correcting amendment is exempt from the APA's delayed effective date requirement.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 553(d).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Congressional Review Act</HD>
                <P>
                    For purposes of the Congressional Review Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) makes a determination as to whether a final rule constitutes a “major rule.” 
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     If a rule is deemed a “major rule” by the OMB, the Congressional Review Act generally provides that the rule may not take effect until at least 60 days following its publication.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 801 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 801(a)(3).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Congressional Review Act defines a “major rule” as any rule that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the OMB finds has resulted in or is likely to result in: (1) An annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 804(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The delayed effective date required by the Congressional Review Act does not apply to any rule for which an agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rule issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     For the same reasons set forth above, the OCC finds that it has good cause to adopt this correcting amendment without the delayed effective date generally prescribed under the Congressional Review Act.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 808.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>As required by the Congressional Review Act, the OCC will submit the IFR and other appropriate reports to Congress and the Government Accountability Office for review.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994</HD>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to section 302(a) of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act (RCDRIA),
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in determining the effective date and administrative compliance requirements for new regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosure, or other requirements on insured depository institutions (IDIs), each Federal banking agency must consider, 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35374"/>
                    consistent with the principle of safety and soundness and the public interest, any administrative burdens that such regulations would place on depository institutions, including small depository institutions, and customers of depository institutions, as well as the benefits of such regulations. In addition, section 302(b) of RCDRIA requires new regulations and amendments to regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosures, or other new requirements on IDIs generally to take effect on the first day of a calendar quarter that begins on or after the date on which the regulations are published in final form, with certain exceptions, including for good cause.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     For the reasons described above, the OCC finds good cause exists under section 302 of RCDRIA to publish this correcting amendment with an immediate effective date. As such, the IFR will be effective immediately.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 4802(a).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 4802.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">D. Regulatory Flexibility Act</HD>
                <P>
                    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     requires an agency to consider whether the rules it proposes will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The RFA applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b). As discussed previously, consistent with section 553(b)(B) of the APA, the OCC has determined for good cause that general notice and opportunity for public comment is unnecessary, and therefore the OCC is not issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking. Accordingly, the OCC has concluded that the RFA's requirements relating to initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         5 U.S.C. 601 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         Under regulations issued by the Small Business Administration, a small entity includes a depository institution, bank holding company, or savings and loan holding company with total assets of $600 million or less and trust companies with total assets of $41.5 million or less. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         13 CFR 121.201.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">F. Unfunded Mandates</HD>
                <P>
                    As a general matter, the Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     requires the preparation of a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate that may 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. However, the UMRA does not apply to final rules for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was not published.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Therefore, because the OCC has found good cause to dispense with notice and comment for this correcting amendment, the OCC has not prepared an economic analysis of the rule under the UMRA.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         2 U.S.C. 1531 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         2 U.S.C. 1532(a).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 7</HD>
                    <P>Computer technology, Credit, Derivatives, Federal savings associations, Insurance, Investments, Metals, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities, Security bonds.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <P>For the reasons set out in the preamble, the OCC corrects 12 CFR part 7 by making the following correcting amendment:</P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 7—ACTIVITIES AND OPERATIONS</HD>
                </PART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="12" PART="7">
                    <AMDPAR>1. The authority citation for part 7 continues to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority: </HD>
                        <P>
                            12 U.S.C. 1 
                            <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                             25b, 29, 71, 71a, 92, 92a, 93, 93a, 95(b)(1), 371, 371d, 481, 484, 1463, 1464, 1465, 1818, 1828(m), 3102(b), and 5412(b)(2)(B).
                        </P>
                    </AUTH>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="12" PART="7">
                    <AMDPAR>2. Add § 7.1001 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 7.1001 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>National bank acting as general insurance agent</SUBJECT>
                        <P>Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 92, a national bank may act as an agent for any fire, life, or other insurance company in any place the population of which does not exceed 5,000 inhabitants. This section is applicable to any office of a national bank when the office is located in a community having a population of less than 5,000, even though the principal office of such bank is located in a community whose population exceeds 5,000.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <SECTION>
                    <SECTNO>§ 7.2001 </SECTNO>
                    <SUBJECT>[Reserved]</SUBJECT>
                </SECTION>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="12" PART="7">
                    <AMDPAR>3. Remove and reserve § 7.2001. </AMDPAR>
                </REGTEXT>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Jonathan V. Gould,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12570 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4810-33-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Office of the Secretary</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>15 CFR Part 4a</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. 170329327-88116-01]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 0605-AA41</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Classification, De-Classification, and Public Availability of National Security Information</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of Security, Department of Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Final rule.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This rulemaking updates and clarifies the Secretary of Commerce's delegation of authority, consistent with current practice, for implementation of the executive order “Classified National Security Information,” as well as for designations of “Original Classification Authorities,” prohibitions of further delegation, the designation of classification levels and durations of information classification, the process for mandatory reviews of information subject to declassification, and the process and conditions for allowing access to Department of Commerce classified information by individuals outside of the Government.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>This rule is effective June 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Jason Groves, Information and Personnel Security Division, Office of Security, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482-2685.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    Part 4a of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulation establishes responsibility within the Department of Commerce for the classification, declassification, and public availability of national security information in accordance with applicable executive orders. Sections 4a.1, 4a.2, 4a.3 and 4a.5 of part 4a reference Executive Order 12958 (E.O. 12958) of April 17, 1995 (60 FR 19825; April 20, 1995). However, E.O. 12958 was revoked and replaced by Executive Order 13526 (E.O. 13526) on December 29, 2009 (75 FR 707; January 5, 2010) (See also, correction of signature date at 75 FR 1013; January 8, 2010). This final rule updates and clarifies part 4a by deleting all outdated references to E.O. 12958, and, instead, referring to the requirements of E.O. 13526. In addition, section 4a.2 lists the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Security as the position designated by the Secretary of Commerce as being responsible for implementing the executive order and 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35375"/>
                    part 4a. However, the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary no longer exists, having been replaced by a Director for Security. The Director for Security, a member of the Senior Executive Service, is now responsible for these duties. Therefore, this rule also updates part 4a by removing all references to “Deputy Assistant Secretary” and instead, referring to the “Director for Security” throughout.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">E.O. 13526.</E>
                     E.O. 12958, which was issued by President Clinton in 1995, was the first post-Cold War executive order to protect information critical to the Nation's security by prescribing a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information within the Executive Branch. It also provided for automatic declassification for information determined to have permanent historical value. E.O. 13526, which was issued by President Obama in 2009, was generally consistent with the previous executive order, but it included additional procedural and systemic changes to reinforce the concept of openness in government by further promoting the declassification and public access to information as soon as national security considerations permit. Among other things, E.O. 13526 established within the National Archives and Records Administration a National Declassification Center to streamline the declassification process, facilitate quality-assurance measures, and implement standardized training regarding the declassification of records determined to have permanent historical value. In addition to the updates noted above, this final rule makes changes to part 4a to add language consistent with requirements set forth in E.O. 13526.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Classification</HD>
                <P>
                    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of review under Executive Order 12866. Prior notice and an opportunity for public comment are not necessary, as they are not required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for rules concerning agency organization, procedure, or practice (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)). The Department finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the date of effectiveness because a 30-day delay is unnecessary (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). This final rule merely updates the regulations to reflect the current position title and the requirements of the current, applicable executive order. The changes in this final rule are consistent with existing policies and procedures. Because notice and opportunity for comment are not required pursuant to the APA or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ) do not apply. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, and none has been prepared.
                </P>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 4a</HD>
                    <P>Classified information.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: April 9, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Michael Harman,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Director for Security.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                <P>For the reasons stated in the preamble, 15 CFR part 4a is amended as follows:</P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 4a—CLASSIFICATION, DECLASSIFICATION, AND PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION</HD>
                </PART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>1. The authority citation for part 4a is revised to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                        <P>E.O. 13526; 75 FR 707, January 5, 2010 (as corrected at 75 FR 1013, January 8, 2010).</P>
                    </AUTH>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>2. Revise § 4a.1 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.1 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>General.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>Executive Order 13526 provides the only basis for classifying information within the Department of Commerce (Department), except as provided in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. The Department's policy is to make information concerning its activities available to the public, consistent with the need to protect the national defense and foreign relations of the United States. Accordingly, security classification shall be applied only to protect the national security.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>3. Revise § 4a.2 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.2 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Director for Security.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>The Director for Security is responsible for implementing and ensuring compliance with E.O. 13526 and this part.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>4. Revise § 4a.3 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.3 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Classification levels.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>Information may be classified as national security information by a designated original classifier of the Department if it is determined the information concerns one or more of the categories described in section 1.4 of E.O. 13526. The levels established in section 1.2 of E.O. 13526 (Top Secret, Secret, and Confidential) are the only terms that may be applied to national security information. Except as provided by statute, no other terms shall be used within the Department for the three classification levels.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>5. Revise § 4a.4 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.4 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Classification authority.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>(a) Authority to originally classify information as Secret or Confidential may be exercised only by the Secretary of Commerce and by officials to whom such authority is specifically delegated. No official of the Department is authorized to originally classify information as Top Secret.</P>
                        <P>(b) In accordance with section 1.3(c)(1) of E.O. 13526, delegations of original classification authority shall be limited to the minimum required to administer E.O. 13526. The Secretary of Commerce shall ensure that designated subordinate officials have a demonstrable and continuing need to exercise delegated original classification authority.</P>
                        <P>(c) In accordance with section 1.3(c)(4) of E.O. 13526, each delegation of original classification authority shall be in writing and the authority shall not be redelegated except as provided in E.O. 13526.</P>
                        <P>(d) In accordance with section 1.3(c)(4) of E.O. 13526, each delegation shall identify the official by name or position.</P>
                        <P>(e) In accordance with section 1.3(c)(5) of E.O. 13526, delegations of original classification authority shall be reported or made available by name or position to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office in the National Archives and Records Administration.</P>
                        <P>(f) In accordance with section 1.3(d) of E.O. 13526, all original classification authorities and their designates shall receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in E.O. 13526 and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>6. Revise § 4a.5 to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.5 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Duration of classification.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>(a) Information shall remain classified no longer than ten years from the date of its original classification, unless, in accordance with section 1.5(b) of E.O. 13526, the original classification authority otherwise determines that the sensitivity of the information requires that it be marked for declassification for up to 25 years from the date of the original decision.</P>
                        <P>(b) For Department of Commerce originally classified information marked for an indefinite duration which contains incomplete declassification instructions, or lacks them entirely:</P>
                        <P>
                            (1) The information shall be declassified in accordance with E.O. 13526 as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under E.O. 13526, or
                            <PRTPAGE P="35376"/>
                        </P>
                        <P>(2) if the standards for classification under E.O. 13526 are met, the information shall be declassified after 10 years from the date of the original classification, unless the original classification authority determines that the sensitivity of the information requires that it remain classified for up to 25 years from the date of the original classification, as provided in section 1.5.(b) of E.O. 13526.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>7. Amend § 4a.7 by revising paragraphs (a), (c), (d), and (e) to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.7 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Mandatory review for declassification.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>
                            (a) 
                            <E T="03">Requests.</E>
                             Classified information under the jurisdiction of the Department is subject to review for declassification in accordance with 32 CFR 2001.33, upon receipt of a written request that describes the information with sufficient specificity to locate it with a reasonable amount of effort. Requests must be submitted to the Director for Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
                        </P>
                        <STARS/>
                        <P>
                            (c) 
                            <E T="03">Processing requirements.</E>
                             (1) For requests for review of classified information not received from the National Archives and Records Administration, the Director for Security, or their designate, shall acknowledge receipt of the request directly to the requester. If a request does not adequately describe the information sought in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, the requester shall be notified that unless additional information is provided, no further action will be taken. The request shall be forwarded to the component that originated the information or that has primary interest in the subject matter. The component assigned action shall review the information in accordance with § 4a.7(c)(2) through (4) within twenty working days.
                        </P>
                        <P>(2) The component assigned action shall determine whether, under the declassification provisions of the U.S. Department of Commerce's Manual of Security, the entire document or portions thereof may be declassified. Declassification of the information shall be accomplished by a designated declassification authority. Upon declassification, the information shall be remarked. If the information is not partially or entirely declassified, the reviewing official shall provide the reasons for denial by citing the applicable provisions of E.O. 13526. If the classification is a derivative decision based on classified source material of another Federal agency, the component shall provide the information to the originator for review.</P>
                        <P>(3) If information is declassified, the component shall also determine whether it is releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as amended (5 U.S.C. 552). If the information is not releasable, the component shall advise the Director for Security that the information has been declassified but that it is exempt from disclosure, citing the appropriate exemption of the FOIA as amended.</P>
                        <P>(4) If the request for declassification is denied in whole or in part, the requester shall be notified of the right to appeal the determination within sixty calendar days and of the procedures for such an appeal. If declassified information remains exempt from disclosure under the FOIA as amended, the requester shall be advised of the appellate procedures under that law.</P>
                        <P>
                            (d) 
                            <E T="03">Fees.</E>
                             If the request requires services for which fees are chargeable, the component assigned action shall calculate the anticipated fees to be charged, and may be required to ascertain the requester's willingness to pay the allowable charges as a precondition to taking further action on the request, in accordance with Department of Commerce rules promulgated under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A) of the Freedom of Information Act as amended and Department of Commerce rules promulgated under 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)(5) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (e) 
                            <E T="03">Right of appeal.</E>
                             (1) A requester may appeal to the Director for Security when information requested under this section is not completely declassified and released after expiration of the applicable time limits. Within thirty working days (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) of receipt of a written appeal:
                        </P>
                        <P>(i) The Director for Security shall determine whether continued classification of the requested information is required in whole or in part;</P>
                        <P>(ii) If information is declassified, determine whether it is releasable under the Freedom of Information Act as amended; and</P>
                        <P>(iii) Notify the requester of his or her determination, making available any information determined to be releasable. If continued classification is required under the provisions of the Department of Commerce Manual for Security, the Director for Security shall notify the requester of his or her determination, including the reasons for denial based on applicable provisions of E.O. 13526, and of the right of final appeal to the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel.</P>
                        <P>(2) During the declassification review of information under appeal the Director for Security may overrule previous determinations in whole or in part if continued protection in the interest of national security is no longer required. If the Director for Security determines that the information no longer requires classification, it shall be declassified and, unless it is otherwise exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as amended, released to the requester. The Director for Security shall advise the original reviewing component of his or her decision.</P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="15" PART="4a">
                    <AMDPAR>8. Amend § 4a.8 by revising paragraph (b)(5) introductory text to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 4a.8 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Access to classified information by individuals outside the Government.</SUBJECT>
                        <STARS/>
                        <P>(b) * * *</P>
                        <P>(5) Receives from the Director for Security:</P>
                        <STARS/>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-10248 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3510-20-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF STATE</AGENCY>
                <CFR>22 CFR Parts 120, 122, 123, 124, and 129</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Public Notice: 11137]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Request for Comment Regarding the Temporary Suspension, Modification, or Exception to Regulations During SARS-COV2 Public Health Emergency</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Department of State.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Request for comments.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Department of State, is requesting comment from the public regarding certain temporary suspensions, modifications, and exceptions to several provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) recently issued in order to ensure continuity of operations within the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and among entities registered with DDTC pursuant to the ITAR during the current SARS-COV2 public health emergency.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments are due by June 25, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Interested parties may submit comments by one of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Email: DDTCPublicComments@state.gov</E>
                         with the subject line, “Request 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35377"/>
                        for Comment: ITAR Suspension, Modification, or Exception—SARS-COV2.”
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Internet:</E>
                         At 
                        <E T="03">www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         search for this notice using its docket number, DOS-2020-0024.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Comments submitted through 
                        <E T="03">www.regulations.gov</E>
                         will be visible to other members of the public; the Department will publish responsive comments on the DDTC website (
                        <E T="03">www.pmddtc.state.gov</E>
                        ). Commenters are therefore cautioned not to include proprietary or other sensitive information in their comments.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Robert Hart, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, U.S. Department of State, telephone (202) 632-2788, or email 
                        <E T="03">DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov.</E>
                         ATTN: Request for Comment: Suspension, Modification, or Exception—SARS-COV2.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>In order to ensure continuity of operations within the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and among entities registered with DDTC pursuant to part 122 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), on May 1, 2020, DDTC issued a document (85 FR 25287) informing the public of the temporary suspension, modification, and exception to several ITAR provisions. These actions were taken in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States as warranted due to the exceptional and undue hardships and risks to safety caused by the public health emergency related to the SARS-COV2 pandemic. DDTC is limiting its consideration of comments to the following three areas and requests commenters confine their submissions to the requested topics.</P>
                <P>1. The efficacy of each of the temporary suspensions, modifications, and exceptions to the ITAR on the operating environments of the regulated community members during the COVID-19 emergency.</P>
                <P>2. Expiration dates of suspensions, modifications, and exceptions to the ITAR—for each expiration date, is the period of efficacy sufficient, or should DDTC consider an extension of the expiration date, and why?</P>
                <P>3. Are there additional temporary suspensions, modifications, or exceptions to the ITAR that DDTC should consider in response to specific difficulties in operating conditions under the regulations that have arisen for the regulated community as a direct result of the crisis, and why?</P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Michael F. Miller,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Trade Controls, U.S. Department of State.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12580 Filed 6-5-20; 4:15 pm]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4710-25-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY</AGENCY>
                <CFR>40 CFR Parts 52 and 81</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0042; FRL-10009-61-Region 5]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Redesignation of the Newport State Park Area in Door County to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone NAAQS</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Final rule.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that the Newport State Park area in Door County Wisconsin is attaining the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard). EPA is acting in accordance with a request from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to redesignate the area to attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because the request meets the statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA), which WDNR submitted on January 27, 2020. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plan for maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2030 in the area. Finally, EPA finds adequate and is approving Wisconsin's 2023 and 2030 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO
                        <E T="52">X</E>
                        ) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the area.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>This final rule is effective June 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0042. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, 
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         or please contact the person identified in the 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                         section for additional availability information.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6832, 
                        <E T="03">Liljegren.Jennifer@epa.gov.</E>
                         The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility closures due to COVID 19.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. What is being addressed in this document?</HD>
                <P>
                    This rule takes action on the January 27, 2020, submission from WDNR requesting redesignation of the Newport State Park area in Door County, Wisconsin to attainment for the 2015 ozone standard. The background for this action is discussed in detail in EPA's proposal, dated March 13, 2020 (85 FR 14608). In that rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2015 ozone NAAQS is attained in an area when the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is equal to or less than 0.070 parts per million, when truncated after the third decimal place, at all of the ozone monitoring sites in the area. (
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     40 CFR 50.19 and appendix U of part 50.) Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas to attainment if sufficient, complete, quality-assured data are available to determine that the area has attained the standard and meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). The proposed rule provides a detailed discussion of how Wisconsin has met these CAA requirements.
                </P>
                <P>
                    As discussed in the proposed rule, quality-assured and certified monitoring data for 2017-2019 show that the area has attained the 2015 ozone standard. In the maintenance plan submitted for the area, Wisconsin has demonstrated that the ozone standard will be maintained in the area through 2030. Finally, Wisconsin has adopted 2023 and 2030 VOC and NO
                    <E T="52">X</E>
                     MVEBs for the area that are supported by Wisconsin's maintenance demonstration.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?</HD>
                <P>
                    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the March 13, 2020, 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35378"/>
                    proposed rule. The comment period ended on April 13, 2020. We received an anonymous request for an extension to the comment period; however, inadequate grounds for the extension were asserted, and we did not grant that request. Finalizing this action will not pose a risk to public health and the environment, since the area has clean monitoring data for the air pollutant in question and the area has met all the applicable CAA requirements for redesignation.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. What action is EPA taking?</HD>
                <P>EPA is determining that the Newport State Park nonattainment area in Door County Wisconsin is attaining the 2015 ozone standard, based on quality-assured and certified monitoring data for 2017-2019 and that the area has met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus changing the legal designation of the area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2015 ozone standard. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Wisconsin SIP, the State's maintenance plan for the area. The maintenance plan is designed to keep the area in attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2030. Finally, EPA finds adequate and is approving the newly-established 2023 and 2030 MVEBs for the area.</P>
                <P>In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause for these actions to become effective immediately upon publication. This is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the area from certain CAA requirements that would otherwise apply to it. The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule “grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction,” and section 553(d)(3), which allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.” The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. This rule, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, this rule relieves the State of planning requirements for this ozone nonattainment area. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for these actions to become effective on the date of publication of these actions.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews</HD>
                <P>Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:</P>
                <P>• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);</P>
                <P>• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866;</P>
                <P>
                    • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    );
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    );
                </P>
                <P>• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);</P>
                <P>• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);</P>
                <P>• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);</P>
                <P>• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);</P>
                <P>• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and</P>
                <P>• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).</P>
                <P>In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on tribes, impact any existing sources of air pollution on tribal lands, nor impair the maintenance of ozone national ambient air quality standards in tribal lands.</P>
                <P>
                    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 
                    <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                     as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
                </P>
                <P>
                    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 10, 2020. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     section 307(b)(2).)
                </P>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35379"/>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects</HD>
                    <CFR>40 CFR Part 52</CFR>
                    <P>Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.</P>
                    <CFR>40 CFR Part 81</CFR>
                    <P>Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 12, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Cheryl Newton,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                <P>Title 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:</P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS</HD>
                </PART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="40" PART="52">
                    <AMDPAR>1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                        <P>
                             42 U.S.C. 7401 
                            <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        </P>
                    </AUTH>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="40" PART="52">
                    <AMDPAR>2. Section 52.2585 is amended by adding paragraph (jj) to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 52.2585</SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT> Control strategy: Ozone.</SUBJECT>
                        <STARS/>
                        <P>
                            (jj) 
                            <E T="03">Redesignation.</E>
                             Approval—On January 27, 2020, Wisconsin submitted a request to redesignate the Newport State Park area in Door County to attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone standard. As part of the redesignation request, the State submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section 175 maintenance plan include a contingency plan and an obligation to submit a subsequent maintenance plan revision in eight years as required by the CAA. The ozone maintenance plan also establishes 2023 and 2030 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the area. The 2023 MVEBs for the area are 0.00027 tpd for VOC and 0.00032 tpd for NO
                            <E T="52">X</E>
                            . The 2030 MVEBs for the area are 0.00019 tpd for VOC and 0.00016 tpd for NO
                            <E T="52">X</E>
                            .
                        </P>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES</HD>
                </PART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="40" PART="81">
                    <AMDPAR>3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                        <P>
                             42 U.S.C. 7401, 
                            <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        </P>
                    </AUTH>
                </REGTEXT>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="40" PART="81">
                    <AMDPAR>4. Section 81.350 is amended by revising the entry for “Door County, WI” in the table entitled “Wisconsin-2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS [Primary and Secondary]” to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 81.350</SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT> Wisconsin.</SUBJECT>
                        <STARS/>
                        <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L1,i1" CDEF="s50,12,r50,12,r50">
                            <TTITLE>Wisconsin—2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS</TTITLE>
                            <TDESC>[Primary and secondary]</TDESC>
                            <BOXHD>
                                <CHED H="1">
                                    Designated area 
                                    <SU>1</SU>
                                </CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Designation</CHED>
                                <CHED H="2">
                                    Date 
                                    <SU>2</SU>
                                </CHED>
                                <CHED H="2">Type</CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Classification</CHED>
                                <CHED H="2">
                                    Date 
                                    <SU>2</SU>
                                </CHED>
                                <CHED H="2">Type</CHED>
                            </BOXHD>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="28">*         *         *         *         *         *         *</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="01">Door County, WI</ENT>
                                <ENT>6/10/2020</ENT>
                                <ENT>Attainment</ENT>
                                <ENT/>
                                <ENT>Marginal (Rural Transport).</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="22">Door County (part):</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="03">Newport State Park Boundary</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="28">*         *         *         *         *         *         *</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <TNOTE>
                                <SU>1</SU>
                                 Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in the designation area is not a determination that the state has regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
                            </TNOTE>
                            <TNOTE>
                                <SU>2</SU>
                                 This date is August 3, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
                            </TNOTE>
                        </GPOTABLE>
                        <STARS/>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-10569 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 6560-50-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>50 CFR Parts 216 and 300</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. 200507-0131]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 0648-BH48</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Procedures for the Active and Inactive Vessel Register</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Final rule; date of effectiveness for collection-of-information requirements; correcting amendment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        NMFS announces approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of collection-of-information requirements contained in regulations published in a final rule on December 20, 2019. The final rule implements International Maritime Organization (IMO) requirements in Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) Resolution C-18-06 (
                        <E T="03">Resolution (Amended) on a Regional Vessel Register</E>
                        ) and amendments to existing regulations governing inclusion on the IATTC Regional Vessel Register (Vessel Register) by purse seine vessels fishing in the eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO). The intent of this final rule is to inform the public of the effectiveness of the collection-of-information requirements associated with the final rule. This final rule also corrects the regulatory text to implement two collection-of-information requirements that were included in the December 20, 2019, final rule and inadvertently set to become effective on January 21, 2020, before being approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Those two collection-of-information requirements were corrected in a correcting amendment in a final rule published on February 13, 2020 and are made effective in this final rule.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Effective June 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Copies of supporting documents are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         docket NOAA-NMFS-2018-0030, or by contacting Daniel Studt, NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802, or emailing 
                        <E T="03">WCR.HMS@noaa.gov.</E>
                        <PRTPAGE P="35380"/>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule may be submitted to the NMFS West Coast Region Long Beach Office at the address listed above, by email to 
                        <E T="03">OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov,</E>
                         or by fax to (202) 395-5806.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Daniel Studt, NMFS, West Coast Region, 562-980-4073.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <P>
                    On December 20, 2019, NMFS published a final rule in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     (84 FR 70040) under the Tuna Conventions Act of 1950, as amended, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, as amended, to implement IMO requirements in IATTC Resolution C-18-06 (
                    <E T="03">Resolution (Amended) on a Regional Vessel Register</E>
                    ) and amendments to existing regulations governing inclusion on the Vessel Register by purse seine vessels fishing in the EPO. That final rule became effective January 21, 2020, except for amendatory instructions that included new or revised information collections, which were delayed until publication of a document in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     announcing the effective date. A correcting amendment was published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     (85 FR 8198) on February 13, 2020, to correct two information collection requirements in 50 CFR 300.22(b)(4)(ii)(A) and 50 CFR 300.22(b)(4)(iii)(B) allowing for the collection of a “business email address” that were included in the December 20, 2019, final rule and inadvertently set to become effective upon January 21, 2020, before being approved by OMB under the PRA and control number 0648-0387. OMB has now approved these collection-of-information requirements under control number 0648-387. Accordingly, this final rule announces effectiveness of the collection-of-information requirements that were published in the December 20, 2019, final rule and corrects the regulatory text to impose the collection of information requirements revised in the February 13, 2020, correcting amendment.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Classification</HD>
                <P>This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866. This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.</P>
                <P>
                    This final rule announces the date of effectiveness and corrects the regulatory text to reflect new and revised collection-of-information requirements approved by OMB under PRA control number 0648-0387 that were published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     (84 FR 70040) on December 20, 2019. Comments regarding the burden estimates, or any other aspects of the collection of information should be sent to the NMFS West Coast Region Long Beach Office (see 
                    <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                     above), by email to 
                    <E T="03">OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov,</E>
                     or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a 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. All currently approved NOAA collections of information may be viewed at: 
                    <E T="03">http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.</E>
                </P>
                <P>The NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (AA) finds there is good cause to waive prior notice and opportunity for public comment for this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), because prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this final rule is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. In part, this action simply provides notice of OMB's approval of the reporting requirements at issue, which has already occurred, and renders those requirements effective. Thus, this part of this action does not involve any further exercise of agency discretion by NMFS or OMB. Moreover, the public has had prior notice and the opportunity to comment on the collection-of-information requirements. NMFS published a proposed rule including the collection-of-information requirements on April 16, 2019 (84 FR 15556), with comments accepted through May 16, 2019. NMFS received two comments on the collection-of-information requirements related to a proposed supplementation of a vessel departure notification and an ability to apply for associated permit applications online. The final rule published on December 20, 2019 (84 FR 70040), addressed these comments, keeping the proposed supplemental vessel departure notice in place for the reasons described there, while revising the purse seine vessel permit application collection-of-information requirements to allow for an online process. Both such processes were considered and approved under PRA control number 0648-0387. Additional opportunity for public comment at this point would not be meaningful and would be duplicative. Any further delay to allow for public comment is therefore unnecessary and would result in public confusion.</P>
                <P>For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).</P>
                <P>These measures are thus exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because prior notice and comment are not required under the APA.</P>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 50 CFR Parts 216 and 300</HD>
                    <P>Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 7, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Samuel D. Rauch III,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                  
                <P>For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 300 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:  </P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 300—INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS  </HD>
                    <SUBPART>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Subpart C—Eastern Pacific Tuna Fisheries  </HD>
                    </SUBPART>
                </PART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="50" PART="300">
                      
                    <AMDPAR>1. The general authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:  </AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                        <P>
                             16 U.S.C. 951 
                            <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                             16 U.S.C. 1801 
                            <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                             16 U.S.C. 5501 
                            <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                             16 U.S.C. 2431 
                            <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                             31 U.S.C. 9701 
                            <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        </P>
                    </AUTH>
                </REGTEXT>
                  
                <SUBPART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Subpart C also issued under 16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.   </HD>
                </SUBPART>
                <REGTEXT TITLE="50" PART="300">
                      
                    <AMDPAR>2. In § 300.22, revise paragraphs (b)(4)(ii)(A) and (b)(4)(iii)(B) to read as follows:  </AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 300.22 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT> Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.  </SUBJECT>
                        <STARS/>
                          
                        <P>(b) * * *  </P>
                        <P>(4) * * *  </P>
                        <P>(ii) * * *  </P>
                        <P>
                            (A) To request a purse seine vessel of 400 st (362.8 mt) carrying capacity or less be listed on the Vessel Register and be categorized as active, the vessel owner or managing owner must submit to the HMS Branch written notification including, but not limited to, a vessel photograph, the vessel information as described under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, and the owner or managing owner's signature, business email address, and business telephone and fax numbers. If a purse seine vessel of 400 st (362.8 mt) carrying capacity or less is 
                            <PRTPAGE P="35381"/>
                            required by the Agreement on the IDCP to carry an observer, the vessel owner or managing owner must also submit payment of the vessel assessment fee to the IATTC.  
                        </P>
                        <STARS/>
                          
                        <P>(iii) * * *  </P>
                        <P>(B) To request a tuna purse seine vessel of 400 st (362.8 mt) carrying capacity or less be listed on the Vessel Register and categorized as inactive for the following calendar year, the vessel owner or managing owner must submit to the HMS Branch a written notification including, but not limited to, the vessel name and registration number and the vessel owner or managing owner's name, signature, business address, business email address, and business telephone and fax numbers. Payment of the vessel assessment fee is not required for vessels of 400 st (362.8 mt) carrying capacity or less to be categorized as inactive.  </P>
                        <STARS/>
                    </SECTION>
                </REGTEXT>
                  
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-10268 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]  </FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 3510-22-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
        <RULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>50 CFR Part 679</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. 200227-0066]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RTID 0648-XY089</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in the Herring Savings Areas of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Temporary rule; closure.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for pollock by vessels using trawl gear in the Herring Savings Areas of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the 2020 herring bycatch allowance specified for the midwater trawl pollock fishery in the BSAI. This action includes prohibiting directed fishing for pollock by vessels participating in the Community Development Quota Program.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), June 15, 2020, through 1200 hours, A.l.t., March 1, 2021.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>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 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.</P>
                <P>The 2020 herring bycatch allowance specified for the midwater trawl pollock fishery in the BSAI is 2,299 metric tons as established by the final 2020 and 2021 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (85 FR 13553, March 9, 2020).</P>
                <P>The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined that the 2020 herring bycatch allowance specified for the midwater trawl pollock fishery in the BSAI has been caught. Consequently, in accordance with § 679.21(e)(7)(vi), NMFS is closing directed fishing for pollock by vessels using trawl gear in the three Herring Savings Areas of the BSAI. The Summer Herring Savings Area 1 is that part of the Bering Sea subarea that is south of 57° North latitude and between 162° W longitude and 164° W longitude from 1200 hours, A.l.t., June 15, 2020 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., July 1, 2020. The Summer Herring Savings Area 2 is that part of the Bering Sea subarea that is south of 56°30″ North latitude and between 164° W longitude and 167° W longitude from 1200 hours, A.l.t., July 1, 2020 through 1200 hours A.l.t., August 15, 2020. The Winter Herring Savings Area is that part of the Bering Sea subarea that is between of 58° and 60° North latitude and between 172° W longitude and 175° W longitude from 1200 hours, A.l.t., September 1, 2020 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., March 1, 2021.</P>
                <P>While this closure is effective the maximum retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time during a trip.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Classification</HD>
                <P>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 closure of directed fishing for pollock by vessels using trawl gear in the Summer and Winter Herring Savings Areas of the BSAI. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of June 3, 2020.</P>
                <P>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.</P>
                <P>This action is required by § 679.21 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.</P>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                    <P>
                         16 U.S.C. 1801 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    </P>
                </AUTH>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Hélène M.N. Scalliet,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12566 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 3510-22-P</BILCOD>
        </RULE>
    </RULES>
    <VOL>85</VOL>
    <NO>112</NO>
    <DATE>Wednesday, June 10, 2020</DATE>
    <UNITNAME>Proposed Rules</UNITNAME>
    <PRORULES>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35382"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="F">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <CFR>10 CFR Part 430 and 431</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 1904-AE77</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Consumer Water Heaters and Residential-Duty Commercial Water Heaters</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Request for information; reopening of the public comment period.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>On April 16, 2020, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a request for information (RFI) pertaining to the test procedures for consumer water heaters and residential-duty commercial water heaters. The RFI provided an opportunity for submission of written comments, data, and information to the Department by June 1, 2020. Prior to the end of the comment period for the RFI, DOE received requests from the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), as well as from the American Public Gas Association (APGA), seeking additional time to consider the issues raised in the RFI and possibly to conduct further testing, in order to establish the applicability and impact of a different test procedure on water heating equipment. In light of these request, DOE is announcing its decision to reopen the comment period on the subject RFI for an additional 14 days.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The comment period for the consumer water heaters and residential-duty commercial water heaters test procedures RFI, published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on April 16, 2020, which closed on June 1, 2020, is hereby reopened and extended. Accordingly, DOE will accept written comments, data, and information in response to the RFI submitted no later than June 24, 2020.
                    </P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032 and/or RIN 1904-AE77, by any of the following methods:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        1. 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        2. 
                        <E T="03">Email: WaterHeaters2019TP0032@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                         Include the docket number EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032 and/or RIN 1904-AE77 in the subject line of the message.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        3. 
                        <E T="03">Postal Mail:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        4. 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery/Courier:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         The docket for this activity, which includes 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         All documents in the docket are listed in the 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The docket web page can be found at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032.</E>
                         The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Ms. Catherine Rivest, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-7335. Email: 
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: 
                        <E T="03">Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by email: 
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    DOE published a Request for Information (RFI) pertaining to the test procedures for consumer water heaters and residential-duty commercial water heaters in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 16, 2020. 85 FR 21104. The RFI initiated a data collection process and seeks input from the public to assist DOE in considering whether to amend the current test procedures for consumer water heaters and residential-duty commercial water heaters. Information received in response to the request will help DOE determine whether amending the test procedures for consumer water heaters and residential-duty commercial water heaters would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for test procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use cycle or period of use. In that RFI, DOE requested submission of written comment, data, and information pertaining to the subject test procedures by June 1, 2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    On April 24, 2020, AHRI, an interested party in the matter, requested a 60-day extension of the public comment period for the RFI that DOE previously published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 16, 2020.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     More specifically, AHRI requested additional time to consider the issues raised in the RFI and possibly to conduct testing, in order to establish the applicability and 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35383"/>
                    impact of a different test procedure on water heating equipment.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         Available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032-0003.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On May 1, 2020, APGA, also requested a 60-day extension of the public comment period for the RFI that DOE previously published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 16, 2020, for similar reasons to those expressed in the AHRI request.
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         Available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032-0004.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On May 27, 2020, AHRI reiterated their request for a comment extension for the RFI. However, in this request, AHRI stated that an additional 30 days would be needed to review test data to assess whether certain modifications to the test procedure would result in a change in measured efficiency. AHRI added that waivers that have been issued by DOE must be addressed in any new test procedures, and must be considered by the industry as a whole so as to convey a unified path forward.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2019-BT-TP-0032-0006.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>After carefully considering these requests, DOE has determined that a reopening of the comment period for an additional 14 days to allow additional time for interested parties to submit comments is sufficient. Therefore, DOE is reopening the comment period for the consumer water heater and residential-duty commercial water heaters test procedures RFI and will accept comments received on and before June 24, 2020, in order to provide interested parties additional time to prepare and submit comments.</P>
                <P>Accordingly, DOE will consider any comments received by this date to be timely submitted.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Signing Authority</HD>
                <P>
                    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 2, 2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Signed in Washington, DC, on June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Treena V. Garrett,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12436 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6450-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <CFR>10 CFR Part 431</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[EERE-2019-BT-STD-0034]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Request for information and early assessment review.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) is initiating an early assessment review to determine whether any new or amended standards would satisfy the relevant requirements of EPCA for a new or amended energy conservation standard for commercial prerinse spray valves (“CPSVs”). Specifically, through this request for information (“RFI”), DOE seeks data and information that could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: Would not result in a significant savings of energy; is not technologically feasible; is not economically justified; or any combination of foregoing. DOE also welcomes written comments from the public on any subject within the scope of this document (including those topics not specifically raised), as well as the submission of data and other relevant information concerning this early assessment review.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before July 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-STD-0034, by any of the following methods:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (1) 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (2) 
                        <E T="03">Email: CPSV2019STD0034@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                         Include the docket number EERE-2019-BT-STD-0034 in the subject line of the message.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (3) 
                        <E T="03">Postal Mail:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (4) 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery/Courier:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>No telefacsimiles (“faxes”) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section III of this document.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         The docket for this activity, which includes 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         All documents in the docket are listed in the 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The docket web page can be found at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2019-BT-STD-0034.</E>
                         The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section III for information on how to submit comments through 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P/>
                    <P>
                        Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1604. Email: 
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2002. Email: 
                        <E T="03">Kathryn.McIntosh@hq.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other public comments and the docket contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35384"/>
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Table of Contents</HD>
                <EXTRACT>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Introduction</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">A. Authority and Background</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">B. Rulemaking Process</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Request for Information and Comments</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">A. Equipment Covered by This Process</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">B. Market and Technology Assessment</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">1. Product Classes</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">2. Technology Assessment</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">C. Screening Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">D. Engineering Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">1. Baseline Efficiency Levels</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">2. Maximum Available and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">3. Manufacturer Production Costs and Manufacturing Selling Price</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">E. Markups Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">F. Energy and Water Use Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">G. Life Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">H. Shipments</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">I. National Impact Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">K. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">1. Market Failures</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">2. Network Mode/“Smart” Technology</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">3. Other Issues</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. Submission of Comments</FP>
                </EXTRACT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Authority and Background</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Authority</HD>
                <P>
                    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency and water efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part B 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. These products include commercial prerinse spray valves, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6291(33), 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(14), 42 U.S.C. 6295(dd)) EPCA prescribed the initial energy conservation standards (in terms of flow rate) for commercial prerinse spray valves. (42 U.S.C. 6295(dd)) 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115-270 (Oct. 23, 2018).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Because Congress included commercial prerinse spray valves in Part B of Title III of EPCA, the consumer product provisions of Part B (not the industrial equipment provisions of Part C) apply to commercial prerinse spray valves. However, because commercial prerinse spray valves are commonly considered to be commercial equipment, as a matter of administrative convenience and to minimize confusion among interested parties, DOE placed the requirements for commercial prerinse spray valves into subpart O of 10 CFR part 431. Part 431 contains DOE regulations for commercial and industrial equipment. DOE refers to commercial prerinse spray valves as either “products” or “equipment.”
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).</P>
                <P>Federal energy and water efficiency requirements for covered products established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations concerning energy and water conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)-(c)) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other provisions set forth under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)).</P>
                <P>EPCA requires that, not later than six years after the issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE evaluate the energy conservation standards for each type of covered product, including those at issue here, and publish either a notice of determination that the standards do not need to be amended, or a NOPR that includes new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) In making a determination that the standards do not need to be amended, DOE must evaluate whether amended standards (1) will result in significant conservation of energy and water, (2) are technologically feasible, and (3) are cost effective as described under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(A); 42 U.S.C. 6295(n)(2)) Under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II), DOE must determine whether the benefits of a standard exceed its burdens by, to the greatest extent practicable, considering the savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered products which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard. If DOE determines not to amend a standard based on the statutory criteria, not later than three years after the issuance of a final determination not to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B)) DOE must make the analysis on which a determination is based publicly available and provide an opportunity for written comment. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(2))</P>
                <P>In proposing new standards, DOE must evaluate that proposal against the criteria of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), as described in the following section, and follow the rulemaking procedures set out in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(B) If DOE decides to amend the standard based on the statutory criteria, DOE must publish a final rule not later than two years after energy conservation standards are proposed. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(A))</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Background</HD>
                <P>DOE codified the energy conservation standards initially prescribed by EPCA, which established a maximum flow rate of 1.6 gallons per minute (gpm) for commercial prerinse spray valves manufactured beginning January 1, 2006. 70 FR 60407 (October 18, 2005). On January 26, 2016, DOE issued a final rule establishing three product classes of commercial prerinse spray valves (defined by spray force in ounce-force (ozf)) and associated energy conservation standards for each product class. 81 FR 4748 (“January 2016 CPSV Final Rule”). The current energy conservation standards are located in title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 431, section 266. The currently applicable DOE test procedures for commercial prerinse spray valves appear at 10 CFR 431.264.</P>
                <P>DOE is publishing this early assessment review RFI to collect data and information that could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of foregoing.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Rulemaking Process</HD>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to DOE's recently amended “Process Rule” (85 FR 8626; Feb. 14, 2020), DOE stated that as a first step in a proceeding to consider establishing or amending an energy conservation standard, such as the existing standards for CPSVs at issue in this notice, DOE would publish a notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     announcing that DOE is considering the initiation of a 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35385"/>
                    proceeding, and as part of that notice, DOE would request the submission of related comments, including data and information showing whether any new or amended standard would satisfy the relevant requirements in EPCA for a new or amended energy conservation standard. Based on the information received in response to the notice and its own analysis, DOE would determine whether to proceed with a rulemaking for a new or amended standard, or issue a proposed determination that the standards do not need to be amended.
                </P>
                <P>
                    When prescribing new or amended standards for covered products, DOE must follow specific statutory criteria. EPCA requires that any new or amended energy conservation standard prescribed by the Secretary of Energy (“Secretary”) be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy or, in the case of showerheads, faucets, water closets, or urinals, water efficiency, which is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) DOE notes that the significant energy (water) savings requirement does not apply to prerinse spray valves. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B) (specifying significant conservation of water for only “showerheads, faucets, water closets, or urinals”); 
                    <E T="03">see also</E>
                     85 FR 8626, 8671. Likewise, the prohibition on amending a standard to allow greater water use does not apply to prerinse spray valves. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1) (prohibiting the prescription of any amended standard which increases the maximum allowable 
                    <E T="03">water use</E>
                     of only showerheads, faucets, water closets or urinals).
                </P>
                <P>To determine whether a standard is economically justified, EPCA requires that DOE determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its burdens by considering, to the greatest extent practicable, the following seven factors:</P>
                <P>(1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and consumers of the affected products;</P>
                <P>(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the product compared to any increases in the initial cost, or maintenance expenses;</P>
                <P>(3) The total projected amount of energy and water (if applicable) savings likely to result directly from the standard;</P>
                <P>(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products likely to result from the standard;</P>
                <P>(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the standard;</P>
                <P>(6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and</P>
                <P>(7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.</P>
                <FP>(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))</FP>
                <P>DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 of this early assessment review RFI shows the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the requirements within EPCA.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="2" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s75,xs180">
                    <TTITLE>Table I.1—EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">EPCA requirement</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Corresponding DOE analysis</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Significant Energy Savings</ENT>
                        <ENT>• Shipments Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• National Impact Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Energy and Water Use Determination.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Technological Feasibility</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            • Market and Technology Assessment.
                            <LI>• Screening Analysis.</LI>
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Engineering Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Economic Justification:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">1. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and Consumers</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            • Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
                            <LI>• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.</LI>
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Shipments Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">2. Lifetime Operating Cost Savings Compared to Increased Cost for the Product</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            • Markups for Product Price Determination.
                            <LI>• Energy and Water Use Determination.</LI>
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">3. Total Projected Energy Savings</ENT>
                        <ENT>• Shipments Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• National Impact Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">4. Impact on Utility or Performance</ENT>
                        <ENT>• Screening Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Engineering Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">5. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition</ENT>
                        <ENT>• Manufacturer Impact Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">6. Need for National Energy and Water Conservation</ENT>
                        <ENT>• Shipments Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• National Impact Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">7. Other Factors the Secretary Considers Relevant</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            • Employment Impact Analysis.
                            <LI>• Utility Impact Analysis.</LI>
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Emissions Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT>• Regulatory Impact Analysis.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>As noted in Section I.A, DOE is publishing this early assessment review RFI to collect data and information that could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of foregoing.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Request for Information and Comments</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE has identified a variety of issues on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and economic analyses regarding whether amended standards for commercial prerinse spray valves may be warranted.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 1:</E>
                     As an initial matter, DOE seeks comment on whether there have been sufficient technological or market changes since the most recent standards update that may justify a new rulemaking to consider more stringent standards. Specifically, DOE seeks data and information that could enable the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35386"/>
                    agency to determine whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy or water; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Equipment Covered by This Process</HD>
                <P>This RFI covers equipment that meets the definition of commercial prerinse spray valve, as codified at 10 CFR 431.262. The definition of commercial prerinse spray valve was most recently amended in a test procedure final rule. 80 FR 81441 (December 30, 2015). A commercial prerinse spray valve is “a handheld device that has a release-to-close valve and is suitable for removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing and ware washing equipment.” 10 CFR 431.262.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Market and Technology Assessment</HD>
                <P>The market and technology assessment that DOE routinely conducts when analyzing the impacts of a potential new or amended energy conservation standard provides information about the CPSV industry that will be used to determine whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination. DOE uses qualitative and quantitative information to characterize the structure of the industry and market. DOE identifies manufacturers, estimates market shares and trends, addresses regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives intended to improve energy and water efficiency or reduce energy and water consumption, and explores the potential for efficiency improvements in the design and manufacturing of commercial prerinse spray valves. DOE also reviews product literature, industry publications, and company websites. Additionally, DOE considers conducting interviews with manufacturers to improve its assessment of the market and available technologies for commercial prerinse spray valves.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Product Classes</HD>
                <P>
                    When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE may divide covered products into product classes by the type of energy used, or by capacity or other performance-related features that justify a standard higher or lower than that which applies (or would apply) for such type (or class) for any group of covered products that have the same function or intended use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) In making a determination whether capacity or another performance-related feature justifies a separate product class, DOE must consider such factors as the utility of the feature to the consumer and other factors DOE deems appropriate. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <P>For commercial prerinse spray valves, the current energy conservation standards specified in 10 CFR 431.266 are based on three product classes determined according to spray force, which is a performance-related feature that provides utility to the consumer. “Spray force” is defined as the amount of force exerted onto the spray disc, measured in ozf. 10 CFR 431.262. Table II.1 lists the current three product classes for commercial prerinse spray valves.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="2" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,r50">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.1—Current Commercial Prerinse Spray Valve Product Classes</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Product class</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Spray force in 
                            <LI>ounce-force, ozf</LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 1</ENT>
                        <ENT>≤5.0 ozf.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 2</ENT>
                        <ENT>&gt;5.0 ozf and ≤8.0 ozf.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 3</ENT>
                        <ENT>&gt;8.0 ozf.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE referenced an Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) WaterSense® field study, which found that low water pressure, or spray force, can be a source of user dissatisfaction. 81 FR 4748, 4758-4759. Further, DOE explained that their market research had identified three distinct end-user applications requiring differing amounts of spray force: (1) Cleaning delicate glassware and removing loose food particles from dishware (which require the least amount of spray force), (2) cleaning wet food, and (3) cleaning baked-on foods (which requires the greatest amount of spray force). 
                    <E T="03">Id</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 2:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback and data on any changes to the end-user applications of each product class (1) cleaning delicate glassware and removing loose food particles from dishware, (2) cleaning wet food, (3) cleaning baked-on food. Further, DOE requests feedback on the commercial sectors purchasing commercial prerinse spray valves in each product class.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The spray force boundaries for the three product classes were determined based on an analyses of commercial prerinse spray valves on the market including a wide range of manufacturers, flow rates, and spray hole shapes and test results of commercial prerinse spray valves with shower-type spray shapes. 81 FR 4748, 4759-4760. DOE stated that shower-type spray shapes provide the distinct utility of minimizing “splash back” that can be associated with nozzle-type designs at higher flow rates. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                     Preliminary research indicates that many of these shower-type commercial prerinse spray valves are in product class 2 (&gt;5.0 ozf and ≤8.0 ozf), with few in product class 3 (&gt;8.0 ozf).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 3:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on the current CPSV product classes and whether changes to these individual product classes and their descriptions should be made or whether certain classes should be merged or separated (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     merging product class 2 and 3, further distinguishing commercial prerinse spray valves in product class 1 based on levels of efficiency, etc.). DOE further requests feedback on whether combining certain classes could impact product utility by eliminating any performance-related features or by impacting the stringency of the current energy conservation standard for these products. DOE also requests comment on separating any of the existing product classes and whether it would impact product utility by eliminating any performance-related features or reduce any compliance burdens.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 4:</E>
                     DOE seeks information regarding any other new product classes it should consider for inclusion in its analysis. Specifically, DOE requests information on other performance-related features (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     cleanability, equipment usage time, splash-back, spray distance, 
                    <E T="03">etc.</E>
                    ) that provide unique consumer utility and data detailing the corresponding impacts on energy and water use that would justify separate product classes (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     explanation for why the presence of these performance-related features would increase or decrease energy or water consumption).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Technology Assessment</HD>
                <P>In analyzing the feasibility of potential new or amended energy conservation standards, DOE uses information about existing and past technology options and prototype designs to help identify technologies that manufacturers could use to meet and/or exceed a given set of energy conservation standards under consideration. In consultation with interested parties, DOE intends to develop a list of technologies to consider in its analysis. That analysis will likely include a number of the technology options DOE previously considered during its most recent rulemaking for commercial prerinse spray valves. A complete list of those prior technology options are as follows:</P>
                <P>(1) Addition of flow control insert,</P>
                <P>(2) Smaller spray hole area,</P>
                <P>(3) Aerators,</P>
                <P>(4) Additional valves,</P>
                <P>
                    (5) Changing spray hole shape, and
                    <PRTPAGE P="35387"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    (6) Venturi meter to orifice plate nozzle geometries.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         A venturi meter is a nozzle where the fluid accelerates through a converging cone of 15-20 degrees. An orifice plate is a flat plate with a circular hole drilled in it.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>DOE is not aware of any new technology options for reducing CPSV flow rate since the publication of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 5:</E>
                     DOE seeks information on the technologies listed regarding their applicability to the current market and how these technologies may impact the efficiency of commercial prerinse spray valves as measured according to the DOE test procedure. DOE also seeks information on how these technologies may have changed since they were considered in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule. Specifically, DOE seeks information on the range of efficiencies or performance characteristics that are currently available for each technology option.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 6:</E>
                     DOE seeks information on any new technologies for reducing the flow rate of commercial prerinse spray valves, including their market adoption, costs, and any concerns with incorporating them into products (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     impacts on consumer utility, potential safety concerns, manufacturing/production/implementation issues, 
                    <E T="03">etc.</E>
                    ).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 7:</E>
                     DOE seeks comment on other technology options that it should consider for inclusion in its analysis and if these technologies may impact product features or consumer utility.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Screening Analysis</HD>
                <P>The purpose of the screening analysis is to evaluate the technologies that improve equipment efficiency to determine which technologies will be eliminated from further consideration and which will be passed to the engineering analysis for further consideration. In this early assessment RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to technologies previously screened out or retained that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>DOE determines whether to eliminate certain technology options from further consideration based on the following criteria:</P>
                <P>
                    (1) 
                    <E T="03">Technological feasibility.</E>
                     Technologies that are not incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not be considered further.
                </P>
                <P>
                    (2) 
                    <E T="03">Practicability to manufacture, install, and service.</E>
                     If it is determined that mass production of a technology in commercial products and reliable installation and servicing of the technology could not be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the compliance date of the standard, then that technology will not be considered further.
                </P>
                <P>
                    (3) 
                    <E T="03">Adverse Impacts on equipment utility or equipment availability.</E>
                     If a technology is determined to have significant adverse impact on the utility of the equipment to significant subgroups of consumers, or result in the unavailability of any covered equipment type with performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as equipment generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be considered further.
                </P>
                <P>
                    (4) 
                    <E T="03">Adverse impacts on health or safety.</E>
                     If it is determined that a technology will have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, it will not be considered further.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Unique-Pathway Proprietary Technologies.</E>
                     If a design option utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be considered further. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     85 FR 8626, 8705.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Technology options identified in the technology assessment are evaluated against these criteria using DOE analyses and inputs from interested parties (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     manufacturers, trade organizations, and energy efficiency advocates). Technologies that pass through the screening analysis are referred to as “design options” in the engineering analysis. Technology options that fail to meet one or more of the five criteria are eliminated from consideration.
                </P>
                <P>Table II.2 of this RFI summarizes the technology options that DOE screened out in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, and the applicable screening criteria.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="6" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,18,14,18,14">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.2—Previously Screened Out Technology Options From the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Screened technology option</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Screening criteria 
                            <LI>(X = basis for screening out)</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="2">Technological feasibility</CHED>
                        <CHED H="2">
                            Practicability to 
                            <LI>manufacture, install, and service</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="2">Adverse impact on product utility</CHED>
                        <CHED H="2">Adverse impacts on health and safety</CHED>
                        <CHED H="2">
                            Unique-pathway 
                            <LI>proprietary </LI>
                            <LI>technologies</LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Addition of Flow Control Insert</ENT>
                        <ENT>X</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Aerators</ENT>
                        <ENT>X</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Additional Valves</ENT>
                        <ENT>X</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 8:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on what impact, if any, the five screening criteria described in this section would have on each of the technology options listed in section II.B.2 with respect to commercial prerinse spray valves. Similarly, DOE seeks information regarding how these same criteria would affect any other technology options not already identified in this document with respect to their potential use in commercial prerinse spray valves.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 9:</E>
                     With respect to the screened-out technology options listed in Table II.2 of this RFI, DOE seeks information on whether these options would, based on current and projected assessments regarding each of them, remain screened out under the five screening criteria described in this section. With respect to each of these technology options, what steps, if any, could be (or have already been) taken to facilitate the introduction of each option to improve the energy performance of commercial prerinse spray valves and the potential to impact consumer utility of the commercial prerinse spray valves.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">D. Engineering Analysis</HD>
                <P>
                    The engineering analysis estimates the cost-efficiency relationship of equipment at different levels of increased energy efficiency (“efficiency levels”). This relationship serves as the basis for the cost-benefit calculations for 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35388"/>
                    consumers, manufacturers, and the Nation. In determining the cost-efficiency relationship, DOE estimates the increase in manufacturer production cost (“MPC”) associated with increasing the efficiency of products above the baseline, up to the maximum technologically feasible (“max-tech”) efficiency level for each product class. In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to these cost-benefit calculations that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.
                </P>
                <P>DOE historically has used the following three methodologies to generate incremental manufacturing costs and establish efficiency levels (“ELs)” for analysis: (1) The design-option approach, which provides the incremental costs of adding to a baseline model design options that will improve its efficiency; (2) the efficiency-level approach, which provides the relative costs of achieving increases in energy efficiency levels, without regard to the particular design options used to achieve such increases; and (3) the cost-assessment (or reverse engineering) approach, which provides “bottom-up” manufacturing cost assessments for achieving various levels of increased efficiency, based on detailed cost data for parts and material, labor, shipping/packaging, and investment for models that operate at particular efficiency levels.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Baseline Efficiency Levels</HD>
                <P>For each established product class, DOE selects a baseline model as a reference point against which any changes resulting from new or amended energy conservation standards can be measured. The baseline model in each product class represents the characteristics of common or typical products in that class. Typically, a baseline model is one that meets the current minimum energy conservation standards and provides basic consumer utility.</P>
                <P>The current minimum energy conservations standards (for which compliance has been required beginning January 28, 2019) represent the current efficiency levels for each product class. The current standards for each product class are based on flow rate in gpm. The current standards for commercial prerinse spray valves are found at 10 CFR 431.266.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 10:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on whether the current energy conservation standards for commercial prerinse spray valves are appropriate baseline efficiency levels for DOE to consider in evaluating whether DOE should propose a “no new standard” determination.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 11:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on the appropriate baseline efficiency levels for any newly analyzed product classes that are not currently in place or for the contemplated combined product classes, as discussed in section II.B.1 of this document.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Maximum Available and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels</HD>
                <P>As part of DOE's analysis, the maximum available efficiency level is the highest efficiency unit currently available on the market. For the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE analyzed all three CPSV product classes. The maximum available efficiencies for these three analyzed product classes are included in Table II.3 of this early assessment review RFI.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="3" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,12">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.3—Maximum Efficiency Levels Currently Available</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1"> </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Flow rate 
                            <LI>(gpm)</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Flow rate 
                            <LI>percentage </LI>
                            <LI>below current </LI>
                            <LI>standard</LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 1</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.62</ENT>
                        <ENT>38.0</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 2</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.73</ENT>
                        <ENT>39.2</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Product Class 3</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.13</ENT>
                        <ENT>11.7</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE determined max-tech efficiency levels based on the least consumptive tested commercial prerinse spray valve in each product class. See chapter 5 of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule technical support document (TSD) 
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     for the analysis of max-tech efficiency levels in that rulemaking.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         “Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program For Consumer Products And Commercial And Industrial Equipment: Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves,” is available at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         under docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0027.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 12:</E>
                     DOE seeks input on whether the maximum available efficiency levels are appropriate and technologically feasible for potential consideration in determining whether DOE could propose a “no new standard determination” for the products at issue—and if not, why not.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 13:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on what design options would be incorporated at a max-tech efficiency level, and the efficiencies associated with those levels. As part of this request, DOE also seeks information as to whether there are limitations on the use of certain combinations of design options.
                </P>
                <P>
                    In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE presented a theoretical linear relationship between CPSV flow rate and spray force, derived from both Bernoulli's principle of incompressible flow and the concept of conservation of mass in a fluid system. Further, DOE verified this linear relationship through market testing of available products and close matching between the theoretical relationship and the flow rates and spray forces of available products. 81 FR 4748, 4762. The relationship between flow rate and spray force is given below:
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program For Consumer Products And Commercial And Industrial Equipment: Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves, p. 5-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="14">
                    <GID>EP10JN20.005</GID>
                </GPH>
                <PRTPAGE P="35389"/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 14:</E>
                     DOE requests comment and data on whether Eq. 1 continues to be applicable for determining the flow rate or spray force of a commercial prerinse spray valve on the market. If not, include any characteristics or technologies which would allow CPSV flow rates to be greater or lesser than that predicted by Eq. 1.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">3. Manufacturer Production Costs and Manufacturing Selling Price</HD>
                <P>As described at the beginning of this section, the main outputs of the engineering analysis are cost-efficiency relationships that describe the estimated increases in manufacturer production cost associated with higher-efficiency products for the analyzed product classes. For the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE developed the cost-efficiency relationships by conducting teardowns of existing products and estimating the efficiency improvements and costs associated with incorporating specific design options into the assumed baseline model for each analyzed product class.</P>
                <P>For the three product classes analyzed in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE developed cost-efficiency curves and concluded that manufacturing production cost was unaffected by efficiency level, both within product classes and across product classes. See chapter 5 of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule TSD for the cost-efficiency curves developed in that rulemaking.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 15:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on how manufacturers would incorporate the technology options listed in section II.B.2 of this document to increase energy efficiency in CPSVs beyond the baseline. This includes information on the order in which manufacturers would incorporate the different technologies to incrementally improve the efficiencies of products. DOE also requests feedback on whether the increased energy efficiency would lead to other design changes that would not occur otherwise. DOE is also interested in information regarding any potential impact of design options on a manufacturer's ability to incorporate additional functions or attributes in response to consumer demand.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 16:</E>
                     DOE also seeks input on whether there is an increase in MPC associated with incorporating each particular design option. Specifically, DOE is interested in whether and how the costs estimated for design options in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule have changed since the time of that analysis. DOE also requests information on the investments necessary to incorporate specific design options, including, but not limited to, costs related to new or modified tooling (if any), materials, engineering and development efforts to implement each design option, and manufacturing/production impacts.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 17:</E>
                     DOE requests comment on whether certain design options may not be applicable to (or may be incompatible with) specific product classes.
                </P>
                <P>To account for manufacturers' non-production costs and profit margin, DOE applies a non-production cost multiplier (the manufacturer markup) to the MPC. The resulting manufacturer selling price (“MSP”) is the price at which the manufacturer distributes a unit into commerce. For the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE used a manufacturer markup of 1.30 for all commercial prerinse spray valves as the market share weighted average value for the industry. See chapter 6 of the 2016 Final Rule TSD.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 18:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on whether the manufacturer markup of 1.30 is an appropriate markup to represent the market share weighted average value for the industry. DOE also seeks data on any changes to the manufacturer markup since the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">E. Markups Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to markups for commercial prerinse spray valves that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>
                    DOE derives customer prices based on manufacturer markups, retailer markups, distributor markups, contractor markups (where appropriate), and sales taxes. In deriving these markups, DOE determines the major distribution channels for product sales, the markup associated with each party in each distribution channel, and the existence and magnitude of differences between markups for baseline products (“baseline markups”) and higher-efficiency products (“incremental markups”). The identified distribution channels (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     how the products are distributed from the manufacturer to the consumer), and estimated relative sales volumes through each channel are used in generating end-user price inputs for the life-cycle cost (“LCC”) analysis and national impact analysis (“NIA”). Table II.4 provides the portion of equipment passing through different distribution channels, and Table II.5 provides the associated markups used in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule.
                </P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="3" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="xls48,r75,14">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.4—Commercial Prerinse Spray Valve Distribution Channels</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Channel</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Pathway</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Percentage through channel</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">A</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Final Consumer (Direct Sales)</ENT>
                        <ENT>17</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">B</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Authorized Distributor → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>33</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">C</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Retailer → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>17</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">D</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Service Company → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>33</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="03" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="xls54,r75,14">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.5—Commercial Prerinse Spray Valve Baseline Markup</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Channel</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Pathway</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Baseline markup</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">A</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Final Consumer (Direct Sales)</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.67*</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">B</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Authorized Distributor → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.67</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">C</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Retailer → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.52</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">D</ENT>
                        <ENT>Manufacturer → Service Company → Final Consumer</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.92</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <TNOTE>
                        * Direct sales baseline markup assumed equal to that for distributors (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         manufacturers would not undercut authorized distributors).
                    </TNOTE>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <PRTPAGE P="35390"/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 19:</E>
                     DOE requests information on the markups per distribution channel as well as the portion of equipment sold that pass through each distribution channel.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">F. Energy and Water Use Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to energy and water use of commercial prerinse spray valves that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>As part of the rulemaking process, DOE conducts an energy and water use analysis to identify how products are used by consumers, and thereby determine the energy savings potential of energy and water efficiency improvements. DOE bases the energy and water consumption of commercial prerinse spray valves on the rated annual energy and water consumption as determined by the DOE test procedure. Along similar lines, the energy and water use analysis is meant to represent typical energy and water consumption in the field. To develop annual energy and water use estimates, DOE multiplies annual usage (in hours per year) by the flow rate (gpm). DOE characterizes representative commercial prerinse spray valves in the engineering analysis, which provide measured flow rates. In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, to characterize the country's average use of commercial prerinse spray valves for a typical year, DOE developed annual operating hours, using data from Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey. Table II.6 of this early assessment review RFI lists the operating hours from the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="03" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s75,r50,12">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.6—Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves Annual Operating Hours</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Building type</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Schedule</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Average 
                            <LI>annual CPSV </LI>
                            <LI>operating time </LI>
                            <LI>
                                <E T="03">hours</E>
                            </LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Education:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">K-12</ENT>
                        <ENT>Weekday only</ENT>
                        <ENT>135</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">K-12</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>188</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">College/University</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>282</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Food Retail:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">All groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>39</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Healthcare:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Outpatient</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>587</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Inpatient</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>978</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Lodging:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Dormitory</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>463</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Motel/Hotel</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>540</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22">Restaurant:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">All groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>Weekday only</ENT>
                        <ENT>259</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="s">
                        <ENT I="03">All groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>7 days per week</ENT>
                        <ENT>544</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW EXPSTB="01">
                        <ENT I="01">Weighted Average Operating Time Across Building Groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>426</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, annual water use was determined by multiplying the annual operating time by the flow rate at an operating pressure of 60 pounds per square inch (psi). Annual site energy use was calculated by multiplying the annual water use in gallons by the energy required to each gallon of water to an end-use temperature of 108 °F. 81 FR 4748, 4766.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 20:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on the annual CPSV operating times as shown in Table II.6.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 21:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on operating pressure of the water typically supplied to commercial prerinse spray valves and DOE's assumption of an operating pressure of 60 psi. If DOE should consider use of a different operating pressure, DOE requests data in support of the alternate value. Additionally, DOE seeks information and data on how the water operating pressure affects energy and water use of commercial prerinse spray valves.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 22:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on the assumed end-use water temperature of the water leaving the commercial prerinse spray valves. If DOE should consider a different water temperature, DOE requests data in support of the alternate temperature.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">G. Life Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to life-cycle cost and payback periods for commercial prerinse spray valves that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>DOE conducts the LCC and the payback period (“PBP”) analysis to evaluate the economic effects of potential energy conservation standards for commercial prerinse spray valves on individual customers. For any given efficiency level, DOE measures the PBP and the change in LCC relative to an estimated baseline level. The LCC is the total customer expense over the life of the equipment, consisting of purchase, installation, and operating costs (expenses for energy and water use). Inputs to the calculation of total installed cost include the cost of the equipment (which includes MSPs, distribution channel markups, and sales taxes) and installation costs. Inputs to the calculation of operating expenses include annual energy and water consumption, energy and water prices and price projections, equipment lifetimes, discount rates, and the year that compliance with new and amended standards is required.</P>
                <P>
                    Based on the nature of commercial prerinse spray valves, in the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE established several assumptions specific to this equipment. First, commercial prerinse spray valves are typically replaced entirely upon failure rather than 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35391"/>
                    repaired. Because of this feature, there were no repair or maintenance costs included in operating costs calculations. Second, purchasing price and installed costs were estimated to be the same across all product classes and efficiency levels. With the purchasing price and the installed cost, which are the same for the baseline and efficiency levels, those costs cancel each other out in the LCC calculation. Therefore, LCC savings come entirely from the operating cost savings.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 23:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on whether the assumptions of zero maintenance and repair costs and fixed installed costs across all product classes are still valid.
                </P>
                <P>In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE defined equipment lifetime as the age when a commercial prerinse spray valve is retired from service. Based on data and Weibull distribution, the average lifetime was 4.9 years. In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, lifetime did not vary across product classes or by efficiency level. DOE assumed that around 10 percent of new food establishments fail within the first year and the commercial prerinse spray valve was no longer in use. Therefore, the lifetime distribution had a 10 percent failure rate in the first year followed by conventional Weibull distribution with average life of 5 years and maximum life of 10 years.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 24:</E>
                     DOE requests the information on the failure rates and lifetime distribution for commercial prerinse spray valves.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 25:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on whether the CPSV average operating lifetime is valid for use in the present analyses and if not, why not? If an alternate value (or values) should be used, what value (or values) should DOE use instead and why? Please provide relevant data in support of any alternative values that DOE should use.
                </P>
                <P>In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE used water prices from the American Water Works Association (“AWWA”) and energy prices from the Energy Information Administration (“EIA”) database of commercial electricity and natural gas prices.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 26:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on whether alternate water and energy price datasets should be considered. DOE requests relevant data and sources in support of any alternative values or methods that are suggested.
                </P>
                <P>In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, the installation costs consisted only of the labor costs of the individual installing the commercial prerinse spray valve and were assumed to be the same for each product class and efficiency level. To determine the labor costs associated with the installation of commercial prerinse spray valves, DOE assumed that the consumer maintenance personnel would be installing the equipment and that it would take a single employee 1 hour to completely install the equipment. Because maintenance employees for different types of businesses and buildings have different hourly wages, the installation costs varied by building type. In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE used hourly wage data for grounds maintenance employees via the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as well as national minimum wage data, as presented in Table II.7. For restaurant and retail consumers, installation costs for all product classes and efficiency levels were the value of 1 hour of minimum wage. For healthcare, lodging, and education consumers, installation costs for all product classes and efficiency levels were the value of 1 hour of grounds maintenance employee mean wages.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="05" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s25,12C,12C,12C,12C">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.7—Labor Cost by Building Type</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Healthcare</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Lodging</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Education</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Restaurants</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Retail</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">$16.75</ENT>
                        <ENT>$16.75</ENT>
                        <ENT>$16.75</ENT>
                        <ENT>$7.25</ENT>
                        <ENT>$7.25</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>See chapter 8 of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule TSD for the installation cost estimates developed for the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 27:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on the costs associated with installing a commercial prerinse spray valve, specifically the number of hours (or fraction thereof) to install a commercial prerinse spray valve as well as labor rates DOE should use to analyze the costs of installation. If DOE should consider alternate assumptions, DOE requests the corresponding references and data.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">H. Shipments Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to CPSV shipments that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>DOE develops shipments forecasts of commercial prerinse spray valves to calculate the national impacts of potential amended energy conservation standards on energy and water consumption, net present value (“NPV”), and future manufacturer cash flows. DOE shipments projections are based on available historical data broken out by product class, capacity, and efficiency. Current sales estimates allow for a more accurate model that captures recent trends in the market.</P>
                <P>In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE relied on historic data from the EPA's WaterSense® Field Study and an industry source to develop the projections presented in Table II.8 of this RFI. EPA's Field Study estimates 1.35 million units installed circa 2010 based on the assumption of one commercial prerinse spray valve per restaurant and restaurants representing 70 percent of the market. See Chapter 9 of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule TSD.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="05" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s75,12,12,12,12">
                    <TTITLE>Table II.8—Projected Shipments From January 2016 CPSV Final Rule</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Product class</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">2017</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Percent of shipments</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">2018</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Percent of shipments</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Spray Force ≤ 5 ozf</ENT>
                        <ENT>22,426</ENT>
                        <ENT>10</ENT>
                        <ENT>22,874</ENT>
                        <ENT>10</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Spray Force &gt; 5 ozf and ≤ 8 ozf</ENT>
                        <ENT>67,278</ENT>
                        <ENT>30</ENT>
                        <ENT>68,623</ENT>
                        <ENT>30</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="n,s">
                        <ENT I="01">Spray Force &gt; 8 ozf</ENT>
                        <ENT>134,556</ENT>
                        <ENT>60</ENT>
                        <ENT>137,247</ENT>
                        <ENT>60</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <PRTPAGE P="35392"/>
                        <ENT I="03">Total</ENT>
                        <ENT>224,259</ENT>
                        <ENT>100</ENT>
                        <ENT>228,744</ENT>
                        <ENT>100</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 28:</E>
                     DOE seeks shipment data on commercial prerinse spray valves shipped over the last 5-year period, separated by spray force. DOE also seeks feedback on how the projected shipments in Table II.8 compare to actual shipments of commercial prerinse spray valves in these years. If disaggregated fractions of annual sales are not available at the product type level, DOE requests more aggregated fractions of annual sales at the category level.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 29:</E>
                     DOE seeks feedback on how common it is for food establishments (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     restaurants or food sales) to have more than one commercial prerinse spray valve and the factors of why of commercial prerinse spray valves are chosen for purchase (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     spray force, intended function such as washing glass vs. pots, etc.).
                </P>
                <P>
                    Product class switching can occur when consumers opt to choose a different product than they would normally purchase because of a perceived change. This change may be an amended standard, the costs associated with the new product, or features (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     need for greater flow rate or spray force for commercial prerinse spray valves). As a result of product class switching, consumers purchase more products of a different product class than originally projected.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 30:</E>
                     DOE seeks information about whether product class switching occurred as a result of the previous amended rule, and if so to what extent. DOE also seeks information about if product class switching would be expected under possible amended standards and if so, which directions and what key metrics would induce the product class switching. DOE requests information on the evidence of such switching and the extent of it.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">I. National Impact Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to national impacts that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>The purpose of the NIA is to estimate the aggregate economic impacts of potential efficiency standards at the national level. The NIA assesses the NES and the national NPV of total customer costs and savings that would be expected to result from new or amended standards at specific efficiency levels.</P>
                <P>
                    In the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule, DOE evaluated the impacts of new and amended standards for commercial prerinse spray valves by comparing no-new-standards-case projections with standards-case projections. The no-new-standards-case projections characterize energy use and customer costs for each product class in the absence of new or amended energy conservation standards. DOE compared these projections with projections characterizing the market for each product class if DOE adopted new or amended standards at specific energy efficiency levels (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the trial standards levels (“TSLs”) or standards cases) for that class. In charactering the no-new-standards and standards cases, DOE considered historical shipments, the mix of efficiencies sold in the absence of amended standards, and how that mix may change over time. In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE assumed no rebound effect for commercial prerinse spray valves.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     See chapter 10 of the January 2016 CPSV Final Rule TSD for additional discussion of the NIA analysis.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The rebound effect refers to the tendency of a customer to respond to the cost savings associated with more efficient equipment in a manner that leads to marginally greater equipment usage, thereby diminishing some portion of anticipated benefits related to efficiency.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 31:</E>
                     DOE seeks comment and information on whether a rebound rate of 0 percent is appropriate for commercial prerinse spray valves. If an alternate rebound rate should be used, DOE requests information and data in support of the alternate rate.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis</HD>
                <P>In this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks data and information with respect to manufacturer impacts that could enable the agency to determine whether to propose a “no new standard” determination because a more stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) any combination of the foregoing.</P>
                <P>The purpose of the manufacturer impact analysis (“MIA”) is to estimate the financial impact of amended energy conservation standards on manufacturers of commercial prerinse spray valves, and to evaluate the potential impact of such standards on direct employment and manufacturing capacity. The MIA includes both quantitative and qualitative aspects. The quantitative part of the MIA primarily relies on the Government Regulatory Impact Model (“GRIM”), an industry cash-flow model adapted for each product in this analysis, with the key output of industry net present value (“INPV”). The qualitative part of the MIA addresses the potential impacts of energy conservation standards on manufacturing capacity and industry competition, as well as factors such as product characteristics, impacts on particular subgroups of manufacturers, and important market and product trends.</P>
                <P>
                    As part of the MIA, DOE intends to analyze impacts of amended energy conservation standards on subgroups of manufacturers of covered products, including small business manufacturers. DOE uses the Small Business Administration's (“SBA”) small business size standards to determine whether manufacturers qualify as small businesses, which are listed by the applicable North American Industry Classification System (“NAICS”) code.
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Manufacturing of commercial prerinse spray valves is classified under NAICS 332919, “Other Metal Valve and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing,” and the SBA sets a threshold of 750 employees or less for a domestic entity to be considered as a small business. This employee threshold includes all employees in a business' parent company and any other subsidiaries.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         Available online at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    One aspect of assessing manufacturer burden involves examining the cumulative impact of multiple DOE standards and the product-specific regulatory actions of other Federal agencies that affect the manufacturers of a covered product or equipment. While any one regulation may not impose a 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35393"/>
                    significant burden on manufacturers, the combined effects of several existing or impending regulations may have serious consequences for some manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, or an entire industry. Assessing the impact of a single regulation may overlook this cumulative regulatory burden. In addition to energy conservation standards, other regulations can significantly affect manufacturers' financial operations. Multiple regulations affecting the same manufacturer can strain profits and lead companies to abandon product lines or markets with lower expected future returns than competing products. For these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis of cumulative regulatory burden as part of its rulemakings pertaining to appliance efficiency.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 32:</E>
                     To the extent feasible, DOE seeks the names and contact information of any domestic or foreign-based manufacturers that distribute commercial prerinse spray valves in the United States.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 33:</E>
                     DOE identified small businesses as a subgroup of manufacturers that could be disproportionally impacted by amended energy conservation standards. DOE requests the names and contact information of small business manufacturers, as defined by the SBA's size threshold, of commercial prerinse spray valves that manufacture products in the United States. In addition, DOE requests comment on any other manufacturer subgroups that could be disproportionally impacted by amended energy conservation standards. DOE requests feedback on any potential approaches that could be considered to address impacts on manufacturers, including small businesses.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 34:</E>
                     DOE requests information regarding the cumulative regulatory burden impacts on manufacturers of commercial prerinse spray valves associated with (1) other DOE standards applying to different products that these manufacturers may also make and (2) product-specific regulatory actions of other Federal agencies. DOE also requests comment on its methodology for computing cumulative regulatory burden and whether there are any flexibilities it can consider that would reduce this burden while remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">K. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Market Failures</HD>
                <P>In the field of economics, a market failure is a situation in which the market outcome does not maximize societal welfare. Such an outcome would result in unrealized potential welfare. DOE welcomes comment on any aspect of market failures, especially those in the context of amended energy conservation standards for commercial prerinse spray valves.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Network Mode/“Smart” Technology</HD>
                <P>DOE published an RFI on the emerging smart technology appliance and equipment market. 83 FR 46886 (Sept. 17, 2018). In that RFI, DOE sought information to better understand market trends and issues in the emerging market for appliances and commercial equipment that incorporate smart technology. DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was to ensure that DOE did not inadvertently impede such innovation in fulfilling its statutory obligations in setting efficiency standards for covered products and equipment. As part of this early assessment review RFI, DOE seeks comments, data, and information on the issues presented in this document as they may be applicable to energy conservation standards for commercial prerinse spray valves.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">3. Other Issues</HD>
                <P>Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the conduct of this early assessment review that may not specifically be identified in this document. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” Executive Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its energy conservation standards rulemakings, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and compliance and certification requirements applicable to commercial prerinse spray valves while remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Submission of Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date specified in the 
                    <E T="02">DATES</E>
                     section of this document, comments and information on matters addressed in this document and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended energy conservations standards for commercial prerinse spray valves. After the close of the comment period, DOE will review the public comments received, and may begin collecting data and conducting the analyses discussed in this document.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                    . The 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     web page requires you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies Office staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
                </P>
                <P>However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. If this instruction is followed, persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.</P>
                <P>
                    Do not submit to 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (“CBI”)). Comments submitted through 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the CBI section.
                </P>
                <P>
                    DOE processes submissions made through 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail also will be posted to 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                    . If you do not want your personal contact information to be 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35394"/>
                    publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments.
                </P>
                <P>Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. No faxes will be accepted.</P>
                <P>Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English, and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Campaign form letters.</E>
                     Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Confidential Business Information.</E>
                     Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked “confidential” including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
                </P>
                <P>It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).</P>
                <P>
                    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of the process for developing energy conservation standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the comment period in this process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about this process or would like to request a public meeting should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at 
                    <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Signing Authority</HD>
                <P>
                    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 8, 2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Signed in Washington, DC, on June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Treena V. Garrett,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12438 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6450-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <CFR>10 CFR Part 431</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[EERE-2020-BT-STD-0014]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 1904-AE68</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Early Assessment Review; Refrigerated Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Request for information (“RFI”).</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) is undertaking an early assessment review for amended energy conservation standards for Refrigerated Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines (“beverage vending machines”) to determine whether to amend applicable energy conservation standards for this equipment. Specifically, through this request for information (“RFI”), DOE seeks data and information that could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a “no-new-standard” determination because a more-stringent standard: Would not result in a significant savings of energy; is not technologically feasible; is not economically justified; or any combination of the foregoing. DOE welcomes written comments from the public on any subject within the scope of this document (including those topics not specifically raised in this RFI), as well as the submission of data and other relevant information concerning this early assessment review.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before August 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2020-BT-STD-0014, by any of the following methods:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        1. 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        2. 
                        <E T="03">Email:</E>
                         to 
                        <E T="03">BVM2020STD0014@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                         Include docket number EERE-2020-BT-STD-0014 in the subject line of the message.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        3. 
                        <E T="03">Postal Mail:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        4. 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery/Courier:</E>
                         Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
                    </P>
                    <P>No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section III of this document.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         The docket for this activity, which includes 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35395"/>
                        available for review at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         All documents in the docket are listed in the 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The docket web page can be found at: 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2020-BT-STD-0014.</E>
                         The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section III for information on how to submit comments through 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Dr. Stephanie Johnson, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1943. Email: 
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1777. Email: 
                        <E T="03">Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        For further information on how to submit a comment or review other public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
                        <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Table of Contents</HD>
                <EXTRACT>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Introduction</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">A. Authority</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">B. Rulemaking History</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Request for Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">A. Significant Savings of Energy</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">B. Technological Feasibility</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP1-2">C. Economic Justification</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. Submission of Comments</FP>
                </EXTRACT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    DOE has established an early assessment review process to conduct a more focused analysis of a specific set of facts or circumstances that would allow DOE to determine that, based on one or more statutory criteria, a new or amended energy conservation standard is not warranted. The purpose of this review is to limit the resources, from both DOE and stakeholders, committed to rulemakings that will not satisfy the requirements in EPCA that a new or amended energy conservation standard save a significant amount of energy, and be economically justified and technologically feasible. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     85 FR 8626, 8653-8654 (Feb. 14, 2020).
                </P>
                <P>
                    As part of the early assessment, DOE publishes a RFI in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    , announcing that DOE is considering initiating a rulemaking proceeding and soliciting comments, data, and information on whether a new or amended energy conservation standard would save a significant amount of energy and be technologically feasible and economically justified. Based on the information received in response to the RFI and DOE's own analysis, DOE will determine whether to proceed with a rulemaking for a new or amended energy conservation standard.
                </P>
                <P>
                    If DOE makes an initial determination based upon available evidence that a new or amended energy conservation standard would not meet the applicable statutory criteria, DOE would engage in notice and comment rulemaking before issuing a final determination that new or amended energy conservation standards are not warranted. Conversely, if DOE makes an initial determination that a new or amended energy conservation standard would satisfy the applicable statutory criteria or DOE's analysis is inconclusive, DOE would undertake the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue a new or amended energy conservation standard. Beginning such a rulemaking, however, would not preclude DOE from later making a determination that a new or amended energy conservation standard cannot satisfy the requirements in EPCA, based upon the full suite of DOE's analyses. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     85 FR 8626, 8654 (Feb. 14, 2020).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Authority</HD>
                <P>
                    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part B 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. These products include beverage vending machines, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6291(40); 42 U.S.C. 6295(v)) 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     EPCA directed DOE to prescribe energy conservation standards for beverage vending machines not later than 4 years after August 8, 2005. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v)(1))
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115-270 (Oct. 23, 2018).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Because Congress included beverage vending machines in Part B of Title III of EPCA, the consumer product provisions of Part B of Title III of EPCA (rather than the industrial equipment provisions of Part C) apply to beverage vending machines. DOE placed the regulatory requirements specific to beverage vending machines in title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) part 431, “Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment” as a matter of administrative convenience based on their type and refers to beverage vending machines as “equipment” throughout this document because of their placement in 10 CFR part 431. DOE has maintained use of the term “product” as appropriate when referring to the statutory consumer product provisions of EPCA that are applicable to beverage vending machines. Despite the placement of beverage vending machines in 10 CFR part 431, the relevant provisions of Part B of Title III of EPCA and 10 CFR part 430, which are applicable to all product types specified in Part B of Title III of EPCA, are applicable to beverage vending machines. See 74 FR 44914, 44917 (Aug. 31, 2009) and 81 FR 1028, 1029 (Jan. 8, 2016). The regulatory provisions of 10 CFR 430.33 and 10 CFR 430.34 and subparts D and E of 10 CFR part 430 are applicable to beverage vending machines.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Under EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).</P>
                <P>Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)-(c)) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption in limited instances for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other provisions set forth under 42 U.S.C. 6297(d).</P>
                <P>
                    EPCA requires that, not later than 6 years after the issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE evaluate the energy conservation standards for each type of covered product, including those at issue here, and publish either a notice of determination that the standards do not need to be amended, or a NOPR that includes new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) In making a determination that the standards do not need to be amended, DOE must evaluate whether amended standards (1) will result in significant conservation of energy, (2) are technologically feasible, and (3) are cost effective as described under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II). (42 U.S.C. 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35396"/>
                    6295(m)(1)(A); 42 U.S.C. 6295(n)(2)) Under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II), DOE must determine whether the benefits of a standard exceed its burdens by, to the greatest extent practicable, considering the savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered product which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard. If DOE determines not to amend a standard based on the statutory criteria, not later than 3 years after the issuance of a final determination not to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B)) DOE must make the analysis on which a determination is based publicly available and provide an opportunity for written comment. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(2))
                </P>
                <P>In proposing new standards, DOE must evaluate that proposal against the criteria of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and follow the rulemaking procedures set out in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(B)) If DOE decides to amend the standard based on the statutory criteria, DOE must publish a final rule not later than 2 years after energy conservation standards are proposed. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(A))</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Rulemaking History</HD>
                <P>
                    In 2009, DOE established initial energy conservation standards for beverage vending machines manufactured on or after August 31, 2012. 74 FR 44914 (August 8, 2009) (the “August 2009 Final Rule”). Standards were established for two classes of beverage vending machines, Class A and Class B beverage vending machines,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and set maximum daily energy consumption limits (in kilowatt-hours per day) based on refrigerated volume. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         DOE defined Class A as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is fully cooled, and is not a combination vending machine; and Class B as any refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine not considered to be Class A, and is not a combination vending machine. 74 FR 44914, 44924. DOE defined a “combination vending machine” as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that also has non-refrigerated volumes for the purpose of vending other, non-“sealed beverage” merchandise.” 74 FR 44914, 44967.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On January 8, 2016, DOE published a final rule establishing new and amended standards for beverage vending machines. 81 FR 1028 (the “January 2016 Final Rule”). DOE amended the standards for Class A and Class B beverage vending machines, and established standards for two new classes: Combination A and Combination B beverage vending machines.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     81 FR 1028, 1113. Compliance with the new and amended energy conservation standards is required for beverage vending machines manufactured on or after January 8, 2019. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         DOE currently defines Class A as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is not a combination vending machine and in which 25 percent or more of the surface area on the front side of the beverage vending machine is transparent; Class B as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is not considered to be Class A and is not a combination vending machine; Combination A as a combination vending machine where 25 percent or more of the surface area on the front side of the beverage vending machine is transparent; Combination B as a combination vending machine that is not considered to be Combination A; and “combination vending machine” as a bottled or canned beverage vending machine containing two or more compartments separated by a solid partition, that may or may not share a product delivery chute, in which at least one compartment is designed to be refrigerated, as demonstrated by the presence of temperature controls, and at least one compartment is not. 10 CFR 431.292.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The new and amended energy conservation standards published in the January 2016 final rule, which are the current standards, are located at 10 CFR 431.296(b). The currently applicable DOE test procedures for beverage vending machines appear at 10 CFR 431.294.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Request for Information</HD>
                <P>DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information during the early assessment review to inform its decision, consistent with its obligations under EPCA, as to whether the Department should proceed with an energy conservation standards rulemaking. Accordingly, in the following sections, DOE has identified specific issues on which it seeks input to aid in its analysis of whether an amended standard for beverage vending machines would not save a significant amount of energy or be technologically feasible or economically justified. In particular, DOE is interested in any information indicating that there has not been sufficient technological or market changes since DOE last conducted an energy conservation standards rulemaking analysis for beverage vending machines to suggest a more-stringent standard could satisfy these criteria. DOE also welcomes comments on other issues relevant to its early assessment that may not specifically be identified in this document.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Significant Savings of Energy</HD>
                <P>On January 8, 2016, DOE established energy conservation standards for beverage vending machines that are expected to result in 0.044 quads of site energy savings and 16 percentage reduction in site energy use over a 30-year period. 81 FR 1028, 1030. Additionally, in the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE estimated that an energy conservation standard established at an energy use level equivalent to that achieved using the maximum available technology (“max-tech”) would have resulted in 0.084 additional quads of savings. 81 FR 1028, 1096. This represents a 36 percent reduction in energy use compared to the estimated national energy use at the established energy conservation standard level. If DOE determines that a more-stringent energy conservation standard would not result in an additional 0.3 quad of site energy savings or an additional 10-percent reduction in site energy use over a 30-year period, DOE would propose to make a no-new-standards determination. DOE seeks comment on energy savings that could be expected from more-stringent standards for beverage vending machines.</P>
                <P>While DOE's request for information is not limited to the following issues, DOE is particularly interested in comment, information, and data on the following.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 1:</E>
                     DOE seeks information on whether the analysis from the January 2016 Final Rule is applicable to the current beverage vending machine market. Specifically, DOE requests comment on whether the previous estimates of energy savings at the max-tech energy use level represent the savings that would be realized were DOE to establish future amended energy conservation standards at that level.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 2:</E>
                     DOE seeks information on the January 2016 Final Rule analysis resulting in the energy savings estimates. Specifically, DOE requests comment and data on updates to the relevant analysis inputs, including stock of beverage vending machines, shipments, efficiency distributions, and the incorporation of various refrigerants in the beverage vending machine market. DOE also requests data on market share by equipment class and refrigerant.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Technological Feasibility</HD>
                <P>
                    During the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE considered a number of technology options that manufacturers could use to reduce energy consumption in beverage vending machines. DOE seeks comment on any changes to these technology 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35397"/>
                    options that could affect whether DOE could propose a “no-new-standards” determination, such as an insignificant increase in the range of efficiencies and performance characteristics of these technology options. DOE also seeks comment on whether there are any other technology options that DOE should consider in its analysis.
                </P>
                <P>While DOE's request for information is not limited to the following issues, DOE is particularly interested in comment, information, and data on the following.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Issue 3:</E>
                     DOE requests feedback on whether the use of alternative refrigerants could impact: Beverage vending machine efficiencies, the viability or efficiency of other technology options incorporated into the equipment (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     refrigeration system components, additional sensing/safety components), the availability of equipment features, or consumer utility.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Economic Justification</HD>
                <P>In determining whether a proposed energy conservation standard is economically justified, DOE analyzes, among other things, the potential economic impact on consumers, manufacturers, and the Nation. DOE seeks comment on whether there are economic barriers to the adoption of more-stringent TSLs. DOE also seeks comment and data on any other aspects of its economic justification analysis from the January 2016 Final Rule that may indicate whether a more-stringent energy conservation standard would not be economically justified or cost effective.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Submission of Comments</HD>
                <P>DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by August 10, 2020, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice and on other matters relevant to DOE's early assessment of whether more-stringent energy conservation standards are not warranted for beverage vending machines.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                     The 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     web page requires you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
                </P>
                <P>However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. If this instruction is followed, persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.</P>
                <P>
                    Do not submit to 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section.
                </P>
                <P>
                    DOE processes submissions made through 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                     provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail.</E>
                     Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail also will be posted to 
                    <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                     If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information in a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments.
                </P>
                <P>Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. Faxes will not be accepted.</P>
                <P>Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English, and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Campaign form letters.</E>
                     Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Confidential Business Information.</E>
                     Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked “confidential” including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
                </P>
                <P>It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).</P>
                <P>
                    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the comment period in each stage of this process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about this process should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at 
                    <E T="03">ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.</E>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35398"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Signing Authority</HD>
                <P>
                    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 8, 2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Signed in Washington, DC, on June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Treena V. Garrett,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12437 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6450-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Internal Revenue Service</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>26 CFR Part 1</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[REG-109755-19]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 1545-BP31</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Certain Medical Care Arrangements</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of proposed rulemaking.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This document contains proposed regulations relating to section 213 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) regarding the treatment of amounts paid for certain medical care arrangements, including direct primary care arrangements, health care sharing ministries, and certain government-sponsored health care programs. The proposed regulations affect individuals who pay for these arrangements or programs and want to deduct the amounts paid as medical expenses under section 213.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by August 10, 2020. Requests for a public hearing must be submitted as prescribed in the “Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing” section.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Commenters are strongly encouraged to submit public comments electronically. Submit electronic submissions via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
                        <E T="03">www.regulations.gov</E>
                         (indicate IRS and REG-109755-19) by following the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted to the Federal eRulemaking Portal, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The IRS expects to have limited personnel available to process public comments that are submitted on paper through mail. Until further notice, any comments submitted on paper will be considered to the extent practicable. The Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will publish for public availability any comment submitted electronically, and to the extent practicable on paper, to its public docket. Send paper submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-109755-19), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Concerning the proposed regulations, call Richard C. Gano IV of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting), (202) 317-7011 (not a toll-free call); concerning the preamble discussion of health reimbursement arrangements or health savings accounts, call William Fischer of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits, Exempt Organizations, and Employment Taxes), (202) 317-5500 (not a toll-free call); concerning the submission of comments and/or requests for public hearing, call Regina Johnson, (202) 317-5177 (not a toll-free call).</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Executive Order 13877</HD>
                <P>On June 24, 2019, President Trump issued Executive Order 13877, “Improving Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put Patients First” (84 FR 30849 (June 27, 2019)). The Executive Order states that it is the policy of the Federal Government to ensure that patients are engaged with their healthcare decisions and have the information requisite for choosing the healthcare they want and need. In furtherance of that policy, section 6(b) of the Executive Order directs the Secretary of the Treasury, to the extent consistent with law, to “propose regulations to treat expenses related to certain types of arrangements, potentially including direct primary care arrangements and healthcare sharing ministries, as eligible medical expenses under Section 213(d)” of the Code. The proposed regulations have been developed in response to this Executive Order.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Deduction for Medical Expenses</HD>
                <P>
                    Section 213(a) allows a deduction for expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or the taxpayer's dependent (as defined in section 152, determined without regard to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) of section 152), to the extent the expenses exceed 10 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) (7.5 percent of AGI for a taxable year beginning before January 1, 2021).
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A section 213 deduction is allowable only with respect to medical expenses actually paid during the taxable year, regardless of when the incident or event that occasioned the expenses occurred, and regardless of the method of accounting used by the taxpayer for filing income tax returns. Section 1.213-1(a)(1) of the Income Tax Regulations.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         Section 103 of the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2019, enacted as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law 116-94, 133 Stat. 2534, Div. Q, Title I (2019)), amending section 213(f) to reduce the threshold for the deduction to 7.5 percent of AGI for tax years beginning before January 1, 2021.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Definition of Medical Care Under Section 213(d)(1)</HD>
                <P>
                    For purposes of determining whether medical expenses are deductible under section 213, section 213(d)(1) defines “medical care” as amounts paid for (A) the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body (referred to in this preamble as “medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A)”); (B) transportation primarily for and essential to obtaining medical care referred to in (A); (C) qualified long-term care services; or (D) insurance covering medical care and transportation as described in (A) and (B), respectively (referred to in this preamble as “medical insurance”), including supplementary medical insurance for the aged (Medicare Part B), and any qualified long-term care insurance contract. 
                    <E T="03">See also</E>
                     § 1.213-1(e).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">A. Medical Care Under Section 213(d)(1)(A)</HD>
                <P>
                    Deductions for amounts paid for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) are confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness and for operations or 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35399"/>
                    treatment affecting any portion of the body. Section 1.213-1(e)(1)(ii). Thus, payments for the following are payments for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A): Hospital services; nursing services; medical, laboratory, surgical, dental and other diagnostic and healing services; obstetrical expenses, expenses of therapy, and X-rays; prescribed drugs or insulin; and artificial teeth or limbs. Section 213(b) and § 1.213-1(e)(1)(ii). However, an expenditure which is merely beneficial to the general health of an individual, such as an expenditure for a vacation, is not an expenditure for medical care. Section 1.213-1(e)(1)(ii). Amounts paid for illegal operations or treatments are not deductible. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">B. Medical Insurance Under Section 213(d)(1)(D)</HD>
                <P>
                    Expenditures for medical insurance described in section 213(d)(1)(D) are amounts paid for medical care only to the extent such amounts are paid for insurance covering the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease; for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body; or for transportation primarily for and essential to medical care. Section 1.213-1(e)(4)(i)(
                    <E T="03">a</E>
                    ). Amounts are considered payable for other than medical care under a contract if the contract provides for the waiver of premiums upon the occurrence of an event. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                     In the case of an insurance contract under which amounts are payable for other than medical care (as, for example, a policy providing an indemnity for loss of income or for loss of life, limb, or sight), (1) no amount may be treated as paid for medical insurance unless the charge for such insurance is either separately stated in the contract or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement, (2) the amount treated as paid for medical insurance may not exceed such charge, and (3) no amount may be treated as paid for medical insurance if the amount specified in the contract (or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement) as the charge for such insurance is unreasonably large in relation to the total charges under the contract (considering the relationship of the coverages under the contract together with all the facts and circumstances). 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract for purposes of section 213, it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. Section 1.213-1(e)(4)(i)(
                    <E T="03">a</E>
                    ). For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or for group hospitalization and clinical care are payments for medical insurance. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                     In addition, premiums paid for Medicare Part B are amounts paid for medical insurance. 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Explanation of Provisions</HD>
                <P>
                    In developing the proposed regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS considered how to carry out the objectives of Executive Order 13877 in a way permitted by law and supported by sound policy. The Treasury Department and the IRS undertook a review of direct primary care arrangements and health care sharing ministries by meeting with practitioners and individuals who operate the arrangements to analyze the facts of those arrangements. After gathering information on those arrangements and considering the relevant legal authorities, the Treasury Department and the IRS propose that expenditures for direct primary care arrangements and health care sharing ministry memberships are amounts paid for medical care as defined in section 213(d), and that amounts paid for those arrangements may be deductible medical expenses under section 213(a). The proposed regulations also clarify that amounts paid for certain arrangements and programs, such as health maintenance organizations (HMO) and certain government-sponsored health care programs, are amounts paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D).
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     These proposed regulations do not affect the tax treatment of any medical care arrangement that currently qualifies as medical care under section 213(d).
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         The proposed regulations and this preamble do not address any issues under Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA) that are within the interpretive and regulatory jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Labor. For example, the proposed regulations and this preamble do not address whether any particular arrangement or payment constitutes, or is part of, an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA section 3(1). Rather, the Department of Labor advised the Treasury Department and the IRS that an employer's funding of a benefit arrangement, in most circumstances, is sufficient to treat an arrangement that provides health benefits to employees as an ERISA-covered plan. Compare 29 CFR 2510.3-1(l), which provides a safe harbor from ERISA-coverage for certain reimbursements for non-group health insurance premiums solely for individual health insurance coverage as defined in 29 CFR 2590.701-2 that does not consist solely of excepted benefits as defined in 29 CFR 2590.732(c).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Definition of Direct Primary Care Arrangement</HD>
                <P>The proposed regulations define a “direct primary care arrangement” as a contract between an individual and one or more primary care physicians under which the physician or physicians agree to provide medical care (as defined in section 213(d)(1)(A)) for a fixed annual or periodic fee without billing a third party. The proposed regulations define a “primary care physician” as an individual who is a physician (as described in section 1861(r)(1) of the Social Security Act (SSA)) who has a primary specialty designation of family medicine, internal medicine, geriatric medicine, or pediatric medicine. The definition is adopted from paragraph (I) of the definition of “primary care practitioner” in section 1833(x)(2)(A)(i) of the SSA. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on the definition of primary care physician and on the definition of direct primary care arrangement.</P>
                <P>The Treasury Department and the IRS also request comments on whether to expand the definition of a direct primary care arrangement to include a contract between an individual and a nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist, or physician assistant (as those terms are defined in section 1861(aa)(5) of the SSA) who provides primary care services under the contract. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on how to define primary care services provided by a non-physician practitioner, including whether the definition of primary care services in section 1833(x)(2)(B) of the SSA is appropriate.</P>
                <P>In addition, the Treasury Department and the IRS understand that other types of medical arrangements between health practitioners and individuals exist that do not fall within the definition of direct primary care. For example, an agreement between a dentist and a patient to provide dental care, or an agreement between a physician and a patient to provide specialty care, would not be a direct primary care arrangement but nonetheless may be the provision of medical care under section 213(d). The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on whether the final regulations should clarify the treatment of other types of arrangements that are similar to direct primary care arrangements but do not meet the definition in the proposed regulations.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Definition of Health Care Sharing Ministry</HD>
                <P>
                    For the purposes of section 213, the proposed regulations define a health care sharing ministry as an organization: (1) Which is described in section 501(c)(3) and is exempt from taxation under section 501(a); (2) members of which share a common set of ethical or religious beliefs and share medical 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35400"/>
                    expenses among members in accordance with those beliefs and without regard to the State in which a member resides or is employed; (3) members of which retain membership even after they develop a medical condition; (4) which (or a predecessor of which) has been in existence at all times since December 31, 1999, and medical expenses of its members have been shared continuously and without interruption since at least December 31, 1999; and (5) which conducts an annual audit which is performed by an independent certified public accounting firm in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and which is made available to the public upon request. This definition is from section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii), which provides that the individual shared responsibility payment (which is zero after December 31, 2018) does not apply to an individual who is a member of a health care sharing ministry. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on the definition of a health care sharing ministry.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Analysis of Medical Care Under Section 213(d)(1)(A)</HD>
                <P>Direct primary care arrangements, as defined in the proposed regulations, may encompass a broad range of facts. Depending on the facts, a payment for a direct primary care arrangement may be a payment for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) or, as discussed below, may be a payment for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). For example, payments for a direct primary care arrangement that solely provides for an anticipated course of specified treatments of an identified condition, or solely provides for an annual physical examination, are payments for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A). However, so long as a direct primary care arrangement meets the definition set forth in the proposed regulations, amounts paid for the arrangement will qualify as an expense for medical care under section 213(d), regardless of whether the arrangement is for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) or medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D).</P>
                <P>Health care sharing ministries, unlike direct primary care arrangements, do not themselves provide any medical treatment or services that would qualify as medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A). Instead, membership in a health care sharing ministry entitles members to share their medical bills through the ministry and potentially receive payments from other members to help with their medical bills. The membership payments are not payments for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A). However, as further explained below, these proposed regulations provide that amounts paid for membership in a health care sharing ministry may be payments for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">4. Analysis of Medical Insurance Under Section 213(d)(1)(D) </HD>
                <P>
                    Section 213(d)(1)(D) does not define the term “insurance.” When a federal statute uses a term without an accompanying definition, the meaning of the term must be determined from the ordinary use of the term, in conjunction with any guidance found in the structure of the relevant statute and its legislative history. 
                    <E T="03">See Group Life &amp; Health Insurance Co.</E>
                     v. 
                    <E T="03">Royal Drug. Co.,</E>
                     440 U.S. 205, 211 (1979).
                </P>
                <P>
                    The predecessor to section 213, section 23x, was originally enacted in 1942 and allowed a deduction for medical care expenses, including amounts paid for health insurance. Although the statutory language did not define “insurance” for purposes of the medical expense deduction, the legislative history specifically states that amounts paid for health insurance are included in the category of medical expenses, and that payments for “hospitalization insurance, or for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or group hospitalization and clinical care are intended, for purposes of this section, to be included as amounts which may be deducted.” This language from the legislative history was incorporated into the section 213 regulations in 1957 and remains unchanged. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     § 1.213-1(e)(4)(i)(a). Based on that legislative history, the Treasury Department and the IRS conclude that Congress intended that “insurance” for section 213 purposes be read broadly. Indeed, the Treasury Department and the IRS have interpreted “insurance” broadly over the years in guidance under section 213. 
                    <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                     Rev. Rul. 79-175, 1979-1 C.B. 117 (premiums paid for Medicare Part A coverage are amounts paid for medical insurance); Rev. Rul. 74-429, 1974-2 C.B. 83 (nonrefundable fixed amount paid by a taxpayer for an agreement with an optometrist to replace the taxpayer's contact lenses for one year if they became lost or damaged is an amount paid for medical insurance); Rev. Rul. 68-433, 1968-2 C.B. 110 (insurance premiums paid for a policy that provides only for reimbursement of the cost of prescription drugs are amounts paid for medical insurance). Further, IRS Publication 502 (Medical and Dental Expenses) states the long-standing IRS position that amounts paid for membership in an HMO are treated as medical insurance premiums.
                </P>
                <P>The Treasury Department and the IRS also conclude that the general insurance principles used for subchapter L purposes are not controlling for purposes of determining whether payment for an arrangement is treated as an amount paid for medical insurance under section 213. Subchapter L does not define insurance. It provides a definition of the term “insurance company” for purposes of determining whether an entity is an insurance company for federal income tax purposes. However, there is no requirement in section 213 that amounts be paid to an insurance company to qualify as payments for medical insurance. Further, the legislative history of section 213 indicates that medical insurance is not limited to traditional health insurance provided by an insurance company. Thus, although payments to an insurance company for medical care may be amounts paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D), amounts need not be paid to an insurance company to be payments for medical insurance under section 213.</P>
                <P>As noted above, depending on the specific facts regarding an arrangement, a payment for a direct primary care arrangement may be a payment for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) or may be a payment for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). Regardless of the characterization of an arrangement as medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) or medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D), an amount paid for the arrangement will qualify as a medical expense under section 213. However, the characterization of a direct primary care arrangement as medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D) has implications for purposes of the rules for health savings accounts (HSAs) under section 223. Specifically, as explained later in this preamble, if an individual enters into a direct primary care arrangement, the type of coverage provided by the arrangement will impact whether or not he or she is an eligible individual for purposes of section 223.</P>
                <P>
                    Under these proposed regulations, payments for membership in a health care sharing ministry that shares expenses for medical care, as defined in section 213(d)(1)(A), are payments for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). The purpose of a health care sharing ministry is for members to share the burden of their medical expenses with other members. Members assist in the payment of other members' 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35401"/>
                    medical bills, and possibly receive reimbursement for their own medical bills in return. Whether this is done by making membership payments to the ministry or by sending the payments directly to other members, the substance of the transaction is the same. Similar to traditional medical insurance premiums, amounts paid for membership in a health care sharing ministry allow members who incur expenses for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A) to submit claims for those expenses and potentially receive payments to help cover those expenses.
                </P>
                <P>Accordingly, the proposed regulations provide that medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D) includes health care sharing ministries that share expenses for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A). This proposal under section 213 has no bearing on whether a health care sharing ministry is considered an insurance company, insurance service, or insurance organization (health insurance issuer) for other purposes of the Code, ERISA, the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act), or any other Federal or State law. In addition, the proposed regulations incorporate the long-standing position of the IRS treating amounts paid for membership in an HMO as medical insurance premiums for section 213 purposes. In contrast, amounts paid to an HMO or a provider to cover coinsurance, copayment, or deductible obligations under an HMO's terms are payments for medical care under section 213(d)(1)(A). Regardless of their classification, both HMO amounts paid are eligible for deduction as a medical expense under section 213(a).</P>
                <P>Finally, the proposed regulations clarify that amounts paid for coverage under certain government-sponsored health care programs are treated as amounts paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). The proposed regulations incorporate the guidance in section 213(d)(1)(D) and Rev. Rul. 79-175, respectively, that Medicare Parts A and B are medical insurance, and clarify that Medicare Parts C and D are medical insurance, for purposes of section 213. The proposed regulations also provide that Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), TRICARE, and certain veterans' health care programs are medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). Thus, to the extent a particular government-sponsored health program requires individuals to pay premiums or enrollment fees for coverage under the program, those amounts are eligible for deduction as a medical expense under section 213. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on whether amounts paid for other government-sponsored health care programs should be treated as amounts paid for medical insurance, and if so, which specific government-sponsored health care programs should be treated as medical insurance.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">5. Direct Primary Care Arrangements, Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs), and HSAs</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">A. Direct Primary Care Arrangements and HRAs</HD>
                <P>
                    An HRA (other than a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement (QSEHRA)) is a type of account-based group health plan funded solely by employer contributions (with no salary reduction contributions or other contributions by employees) that reimburses an employee solely for medical care expenses incurred by the employee (and, at the discretion of the plan sponsor, the employee's family), up to a maximum dollar amount for a coverage period. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     Notice 2002-45, 2002-2 C.B. 93 and Rev. Rul. 2002-41, 2002-2 C.B. 75. Because an HRA cannot by itself satisfy the prohibition on lifetime and annual dollar limits for group health plans under PHS Act section 2711 or the requirement to provide coverage for certain preventive services without cost sharing under PHS Act section 2713 (both of which are incorporated by reference in section 9815), unless an applicable exception applies, it must be integrated with coverage that otherwise satisfies those requirements. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     § 54.9815-2711. A QSEHRA is a type of HRA, except that it generally is not a group health plan and is subject to additional specific requirements, including the requirement that it may be provided only by an employer that is not an applicable large employer, as defined in section 4980H(c)(2). 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     section 9831. Because QSEHRAs are generally not group health plans, there is no need for them to be integrated with other coverage.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         However, under section 9831(d)(2)(B)(ii), a QSEHRA may only provide reimbursements to an eligible employee after the eligible employee provides proof of coverage, and consistent with section 106(g), the coverage must qualify as minimum essential coverage as defined in section 5000A(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>An HRA, including a QSEHRA, an HRA integrated with a traditional group health plan, an HRA integrated with individual health insurance coverage or Medicare (individual coverage HRA), or an excepted benefit HRA, generally may reimburse expenses for medical care, as defined under section 213(d). Thus, an HRA may provide reimbursements for direct primary care arrangement fees.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">B. Direct Primary Care Arrangements and HSAs</HD>
                <P>
                    Section 223 permits eligible individuals to establish and contribute to HSAs. In general, an HSA is a tax-exempt trust or custodial account established exclusively for the purpose of paying qualified medical expenses of the account beneficiary who, for the months for which contributions are made to an HSA, is covered under a high deductible health plan (HDHP). 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     section 223(d); Notice 2004-2, 2004-1 C.B. 269, Q&amp;A 1. An eligible individual is, with respect to any month, any individual if (i) such individual is covered under an HDHP as of the first day of such month, and (ii) such individual is not, while covered under an HDHP, covered under any health plan which is not an HDHP, and which provides coverage for any benefit which is covered under the HDHP. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     section 223(c)(1); Notice 2004-2, Q&amp;A 2. An HDHP is a health plan that satisfies the minimum annual deductible requirement and maximum out-of-pocket expenses requirement under section 223(c)(2)(A), and meets certain other requirements. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     section 223(c)(2); Notice 2004-2, Q&amp;A 3.
                </P>
                <P>Section 223(c)(1)(B) provides that, in addition to coverage under an HDHP, an eligible individual may have “disregarded coverage,” which includes only certain permitted insurance under section 223(c)(3), and coverage (whether through insurance or otherwise) for accidents, disability, dental care, vision care, long-term care, or certain health flexible spending arrangements. Section 223(c)(3) provides that permitted insurance is insurance relating to liabilities incurred under worker's compensation laws, tort liabilities, or liabilities relating to ownership or use of property, insurance for a specified disease or illness, and insurance paying a fixed amount per day (or other period) of hospitalization. In addition, section 223(c)(2)(C) provides that an HDHP may provide preventive care before the minimum annual deductible for an HDHP is met.</P>
                <P>
                    The legislative history to section 223 states that “[e]ligible individuals for HSAs are individuals who are covered by a high deductible health plan and no other health plan that is not a high deductible health plan.” H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 391, 108th Cong., 1st Sess. 841 (2003). The legislative history also states that, “[a]n individual with other coverage in addition to a high deductible health plan is still eligible for an HSA if such other coverage is certain permitted insurance or permitted coverage.” 
                    <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35402"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    In Rev. Rul. 2004-38, 2004-1 C.B. 717, an individual was covered by a health plan that satisfied the requirements to be an HDHP under section 223(c)(2) (including the minimum annual deductible under section 223(c)(2)(A)), but the plan did not include coverage for prescription drugs. The individual was also covered by another plan (or rider) providing prescription drug benefits that required copays but was not subject to the minimum annual deductible under section 223(c)(2)(A). Rev. Rul. 2004-38 held that an individual covered by an HDHP that does not cover prescription drugs, and who is also covered by a separate plan (or rider) that provides prescription drug benefits before the minimum annual deductible is met, is not an eligible individual under section 223(c)(1)(A) and may not contribute to an HSA. Accordingly, if an individual has coverage that is not disregarded coverage or preventive care, and that provides benefits before the minimum annual deductible is met, the individual is not an eligible individual. 
                    <E T="03">See also</E>
                     Notice 2008-59, 2008-2 C.B. 123, Q&amp;A 2 and 3.
                </P>
                <P>The Treasury Department and the IRS understand that direct primary care arrangements typically provide for an array of primary care services and items, such as physical examinations, vaccinations, urgent care, laboratory testing, and the diagnosis and treatment of sickness or injuries. This type of DPC arrangement would constitute a health plan or insurance that provides coverage before the minimum annual deductible is met, and provides coverage that is not disregarded coverage or preventive care. Therefore, an individual generally is not eligible to contribute to an HSA if that individual is covered by a direct primary care arrangement. However, in the limited circumstances in which an individual is covered by a direct primary care arrangement that does not provide coverage under a health plan or insurance (for example, the arrangement solely provides for an anticipated course of specified treatments of an identified condition) or solely provides for disregarded coverage or preventive care (for example, it solely provides for an annual physical examination), the individual would not be precluded from contributing to an HSA solely due to participation in the direct primary care arrangement. If the direct primary care arrangement fee is paid by an employer, that payment arrangement would be a group health plan and it (rather than the direct primary care arrangement), would disqualify the individual from contributing to a HSA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">6. Health Care Sharing Ministries, HRAs, and HSAs</HD>
                <P>Under the regulations authorizing individual coverage HRAs, health care sharing ministries cannot integrate with an individual coverage HRA. However, under these proposed regulations, an HRA, including an HRA integrated with a traditional group health plan, an individual coverage HRA, a QSEHRA, or an excepted benefit HRA, may reimburse payments for membership in a health care sharing ministry as a medical care expense under section 213(d). Because the proposed regulations provide that health care sharing ministries are medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D) that is not permitted insurance, membership in a health care sharing ministry would preclude an individual from contributing to an HSA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Applicability Date</HD>
                <P>
                    These regulations are proposed to apply for taxable years that begin on or after the date of publication of a Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Special Analyses</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">I. Regulatory Planning and Review</HD>
                <P>This regulation is subject to review under section 6 of Executive Order 12866 pursuant to the April 11, 2018, Memorandum of Agreement (“April 11, 2018 MOA”) between the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) regarding review of tax regulations. The Acting Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”), OMB, has waived review of this proposed rule in accordance with section 6(a)(3)(A) of Executive Order 12866. OIRA will subsequently make a significance determination of the final rule under Executive Order 12866 pursuant to the terms of section 1 of the April 11, 2018 MOA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">II. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act</HD>
                <P>Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits and take certain other actions before issuing a final rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in expenditures in any one year by a state, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million (updated annually for inflation). This proposed rule does not include any Federal mandate that may result in expenditures by state, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector in excess of that threshold.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">III. Executive Order 13132: Federalism</HD>
                <P>Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial, direct compliance costs on state and local governments, and is not required by statute, or preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order. This proposed rule does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state law within the meaning of the Executive Order.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act</HD>
                <P>Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), it is hereby certified that these proposed regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed regulations directly affect individuals and not entities. Accordingly, the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.</P>
                <P>In accordance with section 7805(f), this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Chief Counsel of the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing</HD>
                <P>
                    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble in the 
                    <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                     section. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations. Any electronic comments submitted, and to the extent practicable any paper comments submitted, will be made available at 
                    <E T="03">www.regulations.gov</E>
                     or upon request.
                </P>
                <P>
                    A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person who timely submits electronic or written comments. Requests for a public hearing are also encouraged to be made electronically. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . Announcement 2020-4, 2020-17 IRB 1, provides that until further notice, public hearings conducted by the IRS will be held telephonically. Any telephonic hearing will be made accessible to people with disabilities.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35403"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Statement of Availability of IRS Documents</HD>
                <P>
                    IRS revenue procedures, revenue rulings, notices, and other guidance cited in this preamble are published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin and are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by visiting the IRS website at 
                    <E T="03">http://www.irs.gov.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Drafting Information</HD>
                <P>The principal author of these proposed regulations is Richard C. Gano IV of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting). However, other personnel from the Treasury Department and the IRS participated in their development.</P>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1</HD>
                    <P>Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Amendments to the Regulations</HD>
                <P>Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows:</P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 1—INCOME TAXES</HD>
                </PART>
                <AMDPAR>
                    <E T="04">Paragraph 1.</E>
                     The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows:
                </AMDPAR>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                    <P>26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *</P>
                </AUTH>
                <AMDPAR>
                    <E T="04">Par. 2.</E>
                     Section 1.213-1 is amended by:
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>1. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(1)(v) and (vi) as (e)(1)(vi) and (vii) respectively.</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>2. Adding a new paragraph (e)(1)(v).</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    3. Redesingnating newly redesignated paragraphs (e)(1)(vi)(
                    <E T="03">a</E>
                    ) through (
                    <E T="03">c</E>
                    ) as (e)(1)(vi)(A) through (C).
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    4. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(4)(i)(
                    <E T="03">a</E>
                    ) and (
                    <E T="03">b</E>
                    ) as (e)(4)(i)(B) and (C) respectively.
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>5. Adding a new paragraph (e)(4)(i)(A).</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>6. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (e)(4)(i)(B).</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>7. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C):</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>i. Adding a subject heading;</AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    ii. Redsignating the introductory text as paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">1</E>
                    ) introductory text and paragraphs (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">1</E>
                    ) and (
                    <E T="03">2</E>
                    ) as paragraphs (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">1</E>
                    )(
                    <E T="03">i</E>
                    ) and (
                    <E T="03">ii</E>
                    );
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    iii. Removing the words “(a) of this subdivision” and add in their place the words “paragraphs (e)(4)(i)(A) and (B) of this section” in newly redesignated paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">1</E>
                    ) introductory text;
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    iv. Designating the undesignated paragraph following newly redsignated paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">1</E>
                    )(
                    <E T="03">ii</E>
                    ) as paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">2</E>
                    ); and
                </AMDPAR>
                <AMDPAR>
                    v. Removing “subdivision (
                    <E T="03">b</E>
                    )” and adding in its place “paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)” in newly designated paragraph (e)(4)(i)(C)(
                    <E T="03">2</E>
                    )
                </AMDPAR>
                <P>The additions and revision read as follows:</P>
                <SECTION>
                    <SECTNO>§ 1.213-1 </SECTNO>
                    <SUBJECT>Medical, dental, etc., expenses.</SUBJECT>
                    <STARS/>
                    <P>(e) * * *</P>
                    <P>(1) * * *</P>
                    <P>
                        (v)(A) 
                        <E T="03">Direct primary care arrangements.</E>
                         Expenses paid for medical care under section 213(d) include amounts paid for a direct primary care arrangement. A “direct primary care arrangement” is a contract between an individual and one or more primary care physicians under which the physician or physicians agree to provide medical care (as defined in section 213(d)(1)(A)) for a fixed annual or periodic fee without billing a third party. A “primary care physician” is an individual who is a physician (as described in section 1861(r)(1) of the Social Security Act) who has a primary specialty designation of family medicine, internal medicine, geriatric medicine, or pediatric medicine.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (B) 
                        <E T="03">Applicability date.</E>
                         The rules of this paragraph (e)(1)(v) apply to taxable years ending on or after [the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                        ].
                    </P>
                    <STARS/>
                    <P>
                        (4)(i)(A) 
                        <E T="03">Medical insurance contracts and programs</E>
                        —(
                        <E T="03">1</E>
                        ) 
                        <E T="03">In general.</E>
                         In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract under section 213(d)(1)(D), it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, for group hospitalization and clinical care, or for membership in a health maintenance organization (HMO) are payments for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">2</E>
                        ) 
                        <E T="03">Health care sharing ministries.</E>
                        —Amounts paid for membership in a health care sharing ministry that shares expenses for medical care, as defined in section 213(d)(1)(A), are payments for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). A health care sharing ministry is an organization:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">i</E>
                        ) Which is described in section 501(c)(3) and is exempt from taxation under section 501(a);
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">ii</E>
                        ) Members of which share a common set of ethical or religious beliefs and share medical expenses among members in accordance with those beliefs and without regard to the State in which a member resides or is employed;
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">iii</E>
                        ) Members of which retain membership even after they develop a medical condition;
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">iv</E>
                        ) Which (or a predecessor of which) has been in existence at all times since December 31, 1999, and medical expenses of its members have been shared continuously and without interruption since at least December 31, 1999; and
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">v</E>
                        ) Which conducts an annual audit which is performed by an independent certified public accounting firm in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and which is made available to the public upon request.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">3</E>
                        ) 
                        <E T="03">Government-sponsored health care programs.</E>
                         Amounts paid for coverage under government-sponsored health care programs may be amounts paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D). Taxes imposed by any governmental unit that fund such a program, however, do not constitute amounts paid for medical insurance. The following government-sponsored health care programs are medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D):
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">i</E>
                        ) The Medicare program under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c and following sections), including Parts A, B, C, and D;
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">ii</E>
                        ) Medicaid programs under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 and following sections);
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">iii</E>
                        ) The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) under title XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa and following sections);
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">iv</E>
                        ) Medical coverage under chapter 55 of title 10, U.S.C., including coverage under the TRICARE program; and
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">v</E>
                        ) Veterans' health care programs under chapter 17 or 18 of Title 38 U.S.C.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">4</E>
                        ) 
                        <E T="03">Applicability date.</E>
                         The rules of this paragraph (e)(4)(i)(
                        <E T="03">a</E>
                        ) apply to taxable years ending on or after [the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                        ].
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (B) 
                        <E T="03">Insurance contract covering more than medical care.</E>
                         Amounts are paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D) only to the extent that such amounts are paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care referred to in paragraph (e)(1) of this section or for any qualified long-term care insurance contract as defined in section 7702B(b). Amounts will be considered payable for other than medical insurance under a contract if the contract provides for the waiver of premiums upon the 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35404"/>
                        occurrence of an event. In the case of an insurance contract under which amounts are payable for other than medical insurance (as, for example, a policy providing an indemnity for loss of income or for loss of life, limb, or sight)—
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">1</E>
                        ) No amount shall be treated as paid for medical insurance under section 213(d)(1)(D) unless the charge for such insurance is either separately stated in the contract or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement,
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">2</E>
                        ) The amount taken into account as the amount paid for such medical insurance shall not exceed such charge, and
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (
                        <E T="03">3</E>
                        ) No amount shall be treated as paid for such medical insurance if the amount specified in the contract (or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement) as the charge for such insurance is unreasonably large in relation to the total charges under the contract. In determining whether a separately stated charge for insurance covering expenses of medical care is unreasonably large in relation to the total premium, the relationship of the coverage under the contract together with all of the facts and circumstances shall be considered.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (C) 
                        <E T="03">Premiums paid after taxpayer attains the age of 65.</E>
                         * * *
                    </P>
                    <STARS/>
                </SECTION>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Sunita Lough,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12213 Filed 6-8-20; 4:15 pm]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4830-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Coast Guard</SUBAGY>
                <CFR>33 CFR Part 100</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. USCG-2020-0081]</DEPDOC>
                <RIN>RIN 1625-AA08</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Special Local Regulation; Choptank River, Hambrooks Bay, Cambridge, MD</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Coast Guard, DHS.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Coast Guard is withdrawing its proposed rule concerning temporary special local regulations for certain waters of the Choptank River that was to have been in effect on July 25, 2020 and July 26, 2020 to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters located at Cambridge, MD during a high-speed power boat racing event. The proposed rule is being withdrawn because it is no longer necessary. The event sponsor has cancelled the boat race.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The Coast Guard is withdrawing the proposed rule published May 6, 2020 (85 FR 26903) as of June 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        To view the docket for this withdrawn rulemaking, go to 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         type USCG-2020-0081 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        If you have questions about this notice, call or email MST3 Courtney Perry, Sector Maryland-National Capital Region Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (410) 576-2674, email 
                        <E T="03">Courtney.E.Perry@uscg.mil</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <P>
                    On May 6, 2020, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled “Special Local Regulation; Choptank River, Hambrooks Bay, Cambridge, MD” in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     (85 FR 26903). The rulemaking concerned was proposing to establish temporary special local regulations for certain waters of the Choptank River in Cambridge, MD on July 25, 2020 and July 26, 2020. This action was necessary to provide for the safety of life on these waters during a high-speed power boat racing event. This rulemaking would have prohibited persons and vessels from entering the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or a designated representative.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Withdrawal</HD>
                <P>The proposed rule is being withdrawn due to a regulated area no longer being necessary following a cancellation of the high-speed power boat racing event by the event sponsor.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Authority</HD>
                <P>We are issuing this notice of withdrawal under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 70034.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Joseph B. Loring,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12581 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 9110-04-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">POSTAL SERVICE</AGENCY>
                <CFR>39 CFR Part 551</CFR>
                <SUBJECT>Semipostal Stamp Program</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Postal Service
                        <E T="51">TM</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Proposed rule.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This proposed rule would revise the provisions governing the Postal Service's discretionary Semipostal Stamp Program to provide more flexibility to the Postal Service to manage the program. Revisions include removing restrictions on the duration of sales of semipostal discretionary stamps and the number of discretionary semipostal stamps that may be offered at any one time.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments must be received on or before July 10, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Mail or deliver written comments to the Manager, Stamp Products &amp; Exhibitions, U.S. Postal Service®, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Room 3300, Washington, DC 20260. Email and faxed comments are not accepted. You may inspect and photocopy all written comments at the Stamp Products &amp; Exhibitions office by appointment only between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling 202-268-7998 in advance.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Amity C. Kirby, Manager, Stamp Products &amp; Exhibitions, 202-268-7998, 
                        <E T="03">amity.c.kirby@usps.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <P>
                    The Semipostal Authorization Act, Public Law 106-253, grants the Postal Service discretionary authority to issue and sell semipostal stamps to advance such causes as it considers to be “in the national public interest and appropriate.” See 39 U.S.C. 416(b). On June 12, 2001, the Postal Service published a final rule establishing the regulations in 39 CFR part 551 for the discretionary Semipostal Stamp Program (66 FR 31826). Minor revisions were made to these regulations to implement Public Law 107-67, 115 Stat. 514 (2001), and to reflect minor organizational changes in the Postal Service (67 FR 5215 (February 5, 2002)). On February 19, 2004, the Postal Service published a final rule clarifying the cost-offset policy for semipostal stamps (69 FR 7688), and on February 9, 2005, the Postal Service also published an additional minor clarifying revision to these cost-offset regulations (70 FR 6764). On April 20, 2016, the Postal Service published a final rule removing certain restrictions on the commencement date for the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35405"/>
                    discretionary Semipostal Stamp Program, and clarifying how many discretionary semipostal stamps may be on sale at any one time, and other matters (81 FR 23162).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Changes</HD>
                <P>The Postal Service has encountered continued interest in the sale of a previously offered discretionary semipostal stamp for which the Postal Service possesses unsold inventory. The current version of the regulations limits sales of discretionary semipostal stamps to one at a time and a two-year sales period. In administering this program, it has become clear that there is interest in and demand for a lengthier period of sale for individual offerings from customers, stakeholders and congressional policymakers. The current regulations also contemplated issuing five stamps over ten years, which has proven impracticable. Upon further consideration, it was determined that further revision of the rules concerning the discretionary Semipostal Stamp Program could facilitate continued interest in previously offered stamps, especially when unsold inventory remains, and provide the Postal Service greater flexibility to manage the 10-year program.</P>
                <P>In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 416(e)(2), the Postal Service invites public comment on the following proposed amendments to the Code of Federal Regulations.</P>
                <LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 551</HD>
                    <P>Administrative practice and procedure.</P>
                </LSTSUB>
                <P>For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Postal Service proposes to revise 39 CFR part 551 as follows:</P>
                <PART>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 551—SEMIPOSTAL STAMP PROGRAM</HD>
                </PART>
                <AMDPAR>1. The authority citation for part 551 continues to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                    <P>39 U.S.C. 101, 201, 203, 401, 403, 404, 410, 414, 416.</P>
                </AUTH>
                <AMDPAR>2. Amend § 551.3, by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                <SECTION>
                    <SECTNO>§ 551.3 </SECTNO>
                    <SUBJECT>Procedure for selection of causes and recipient executive agencies.</SUBJECT>
                    <STARS/>
                    <P>
                        (a) The Office of Stamp Services will accept proposals from interested persons for future semipostal stamps beginning on May 20, 2016. The Office of Stamp Services will begin considering proposals on July 5, 2016. This section should not be read to reflect the intention of the Postal Service to issue any particular number of semipostal stamps during the 10-year period of these regulations. Proposals may be submitted and will be considered on a rolling basis until seven years after May 20, 2016. The Office of Stamp Services may publicize this request for proposals in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         or through other means, as it determines in its discretion. Proposals for semipostal stamps made prior to May 20, 2016 will not be given further consideration. Nothing in these regulations should be construed as barring the resubmission of previously submitted causes and recipient executive agencies.
                    </P>
                    <STARS/>
                </SECTION>
                <SECTION>
                    <SECTNO>§ 551.5 </SECTNO>
                    <SUBJECT>[Amended]</SUBJECT>
                </SECTION>
                <AMDPAR>3. In § 551.5, remove and reserve paragraphs (b) and (c).</AMDPAR>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Ruth Stevenson,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Attorney, Federal Compliance.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12412 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 7710-12-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <CFR>47 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 18</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[ET Docket No. 19-226; FCC 19-126; DA 20-521; FRS 16783]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields, Reopening of Comment Period</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Communications Commission.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Proposed rule, reopening of comment period.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Federal Communications Commission (Commission) is reopening the comment and reply comment date that appeared in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on April 6, 2020. In this document, the Commission seeks comment on expanding the range of frequencies for which its radiofrequency (RF) exposure limits apply; on applying localized exposure limits above 6 GHz in parallel to the localized exposure limits already established below 6 GHz; on specifying the conditions and methods for averaging the RF exposure, in both time and area, during evaluation for compliance with the RF exposure limits in the rules; on addressing new RF exposure issues raised by wireless power transfer (WPT) devices; and on the definition of a WPT device.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments are reopened for the proposed rule published April 6, 2020 (85 FR 19117), and are now due on or before [June 17, 2020], and reply comments are due on or before [July 20, 2020].</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Interested parties may submit comments and replies, identified by ET Docket No. 19-226, by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Electronic Filers:</E>
                         Comments may be filed electronically using the internet by accessing the ECFS: 
                        <E T="03">http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Paper Filers:</E>
                         Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing.
                    </P>
                    <P>• Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.</P>
                    <P>• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.U.S.</P>
                    <P>• Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.</P>
                    <P>
                        • Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See 
                        <E T="03">FCC Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-Delivery Policy,</E>
                         Public Notice, DA 20-304 (March 19, 2020). 
                        <E T="03">https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>• During the time the Commission's building is closed to the general public and until further notice, if more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of a proceeding, paper filers need not submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number; an original and one copy are sufficient.</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">People with Disabilities:</E>
                         Contact the Commission to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: 
                        <E T="03">FCC504@fcc.gov</E>
                         or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Martin Doczkat, email: 
                        <E T="03">martin.doczkat@fcc.gov</E>
                         of the Office of Engineering and Technology Electromagnetic Compatibility Division; the Commission's RF Safety Program, 
                        <E T="03">rfsafety@fcc.gov</E>
                        ; or call the Office of Engineering and Technology at (202) 418-2470.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        For information regarding the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35406"/>
                        information collection requirements contained in this document, contact Nicole Ongele, Office of Managing Director, at (202) 418-2991 or 
                        <E T="03">Nicole.Ongele@fcc.gov</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <SIG>
                        <FP>Federal Communications Commission.</FP>
                        <NAME>Ronald T. Repasi,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Acting Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12417 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6712-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
        <PRORULE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <CFR>47 CFR Part 64</CFR>
                <DEPDOC>[EB Docket No. 20-22; FCC 20-34]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Implementing the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Communications Commission.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Proposed rule.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>In this document, the Commission invites comment on what action the Commission should take, pursuant to the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act, if the registered consortium contemplated by the TRACED Act identifies a provider of voice service subject to a delay of compliance with the STIR/SHAKEN implementation mandate as repeatedly originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns.</P>
                </SUM>
                <EFFDATE>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments are due on or before July 10, 2020 and reply comments are due on or before July 27, 2020.</P>
                </EFFDATE>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>You may submit comments, identified by EB Docket No. 20-22, by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Electronic Filers:</E>
                         Comments may be filed electronically using the internet by accessing the ECFS: 
                        <E T="03">http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs2/</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Paper Filers:</E>
                         Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.
                    </P>
                    <P>Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.</P>
                    <P>• Ιf FCC Headquarters is open to the public, all hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building.</P>
                    <P>• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.</P>
                    <P>• U.S. Postal Service first class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">People with Disabilities:</E>
                         Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: 
                        <E T="03">FCC504@fcc.gov</E>
                         or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        For additional information on this proceeding, contact Mason Shefa of the Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at 
                        <E T="03">Mason.Shefa@fcc.gov</E>
                         or (202) 418-2962.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 20-34, EB Docket No. 20-22, adopted on March 27, 2020 and released on March 27, 2020. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554, or online at 
                    <E T="03">https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-34A1.pdf</E>
                    . To request this document in accessible formats for people with disabilities (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format, etc.) or to request reasonable accommodations (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.), send an email to 
                    <E T="03">fcc504@fcc.gov</E>
                     or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Synopsis</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking</HD>
                <P>1. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Further Notice), the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) invites comment on the interpretation and implementation of section 4(b)(5)(C)(ii) and (iii) of the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement Act (TRACED Act). The TRACED Act mandates the widespread implementation of STIR/SHAKEN, a technology that enables voice service providers to verify that the caller ID information transmitted with a particular call matches the caller's number, but also contemplates that some voice service providers facing barriers to implementation may be granted a delay of compliance. To keep such providers from becoming new sources of unlawful robocalls, the TRACED Act requires the Commission to take action if the registered consortium identifies a provider of voice service that is subject to a delay of compliance as repeatedly originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns.</P>
                <P>2. By what standard should the consortium identify voice service providers that are originating unlawful robocall campaigns, and how should the consortium assess whether a campaign is “large-scale”? What does “unlawful robocall campaigns” mean? The TRACED Act defines “suspected unlawful robocall” as calls that the Commission or a voice service provider reasonably believes to violate sections 227(b) or (e) of the Communications Act. Is the term “unlawful robocall” in section 4(b)(5)(C) of the TRACED Act narrower than “suspected unlawful robocall,” in section 13 of the TRACED Act, and if so, what level of certainty does it require? At what point would a series of unlawful calls become a “campaign”? Does “campaign” suggest a pattern of calls that appear to be coordinated? How should the consortium assess whether a campaign is “large-scale”? Should “large-scale” refer only to call volume, or does it account for other factors such as burden on networks?</P>
                <P>3. Once a provider has been identified by the registered consortium, the Commission must require the provider to take action to ensure that such provider does not continue to originate such calls and make reasonable efforts to minimize the burden of any such robocall mitigation, which may include prescribing certain specific robocall mitigation practices for providers of voice service that have repeatedly originated large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns.</P>
                <P>
                    4. What action or actions should we require of identified providers to ensure they do not continue to originate unlawful robocalls? Should we prescribe specific robocall mitigation practices, and if so, what practices should we prescribe? Should we require an identified provider to submit to close monitoring of its practices? Should we, the registered consortium, or some 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35407"/>
                    independent third party monitor these practices? Should we require the identified provider to submit a compliance plan and periodic reports on its efforts to conform to that plan? Should we propose that an identified provider make a point of contact available to the Commission, the consortium, and others and to respond to concerns within a specified period of time, such as 14 days? Should we require an identified provider to implement know-your-customer obligations—and report the contact information for each of its customers to the registered consortium or the Commission? Should we require identified providers to implement internal measures to monitor the traffic transiting their networks to ensure that it is consistent with legitimate voice traffic and to act in response to aberrant patterns? What are the benefits and drawbacks of these approaches?
                </P>
                <P>5. Finally, as required by the TRACED Act, how can we ensure that any robocall mitigation requirements are not overly burdensome, but achieve the goal of mitigating robocalls originated by voice service providers identified as originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns? Should we prescribe specific robocall mitigation practices for the identified providers? Do commenters have other suggestions for how we should address voice service providers who are identified as originating unlawful robocall campaigns? We emphasize that we will continue to take enforcement action against perpetrators of unlawful robocall campaigns.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis</HD>
                <P>6. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by the RFA, the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules addressed in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Further Notice). Written public comments are requested on the IRFA. Comments must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Further Notice indicated on the first page of this document and must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    7. The 
                    <E T="03">Further Notice</E>
                     continues the Commission's efforts to combat illegal spoofed robocalls and fulfill its obligations under the TRACED Act. In the Further Notice, the Commission poses questions and issues for commenters to address which will shape the final rules adopted in this proceeding. More specifically, pursuant to its obligations in section 4(b)(5)(C)(ii) of the TRACED Act, the Commission seeks input on standards and on how to guide a consortium's identification of voice service providers that “repeatedly originat[e] large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns.” The Commission also seeks input on what actions we should take once such providers are identified, whether to adopt robocall mitigation practices, what type and whether or not to require compliance plans and whether and what type of reporting obligations should be implemented. Finally, as required by the TRACED Act, the Commission inquires how it can ensure that any robocall mitigation requirements that are adopted are not overly burdensome while simultaneously mitigating robocalls originated by voice service providers identified as originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Legal Basis</HD>
                <P>8. The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 4(j), 227, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(1), 154(j), 227, and 303(r), and section 4(b)(5)(C) of the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act, Public Law  116-105, 133 Stat. 3274.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply</HD>
                <P>9. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules on which the Notice seeks comment, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small-business concern” under the Small Business Act. A “small-business concern” is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Wireline Carriers</HD>
                <P>
                    10. 
                    <E T="03">Wired Telecommunications Carriers.</E>
                     The U.S. Census Bureau defines this industry as “establishments primarily engaged in operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, establishments providing satellite television distribution services using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which consists of all such companies having 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms in this industry can be considered small.
                </P>
                <P>
                    11. 
                    <E T="03">Local Exchange Carriers (LECs).</E>
                     Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses specifically applicable to local exchange services. The closest applicable NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 3,117 firms operated for the entire year. Of that total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus under this category and the associated size standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of local exchange carriers are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    12. 
                    <E T="03">Incumbent LECs.</E>
                     Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small-business size standard specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The closest applicable NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 indicates that 3,117 firms operated the entire year. Of this total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Consequently, the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35408"/>
                    Commission estimates that most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses that may be affected by our actions. According to Commission data, 1,307 Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers reported that they were incumbent local exchange service providers. Of this total, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Thus, using the SBA's size standard, the majority of incumbent LECs can be considered small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    13. 
                    <E T="03">Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs), Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers.</E>
                     Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small-business size standard specifically for these service providers. The most appropriate NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 indicate that 3,117 firms operated during that year. Of that number, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Based on these data, the Commission concludes that the majority of Competitive LECS, CAPs, Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers are small entities. According to Commission data, 1,442 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of either competitive local exchange services or competitive access provider services. Of these 1,442 carriers, an estimated 1,256 have 1,500 or fewer employees. In addition, 17 carriers have reported that they are Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and all 17 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees. Additionally, 72 carriers have reported that they are Other Local Service Providers. Of this total, 70 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, based on internally researched FCC data, the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange service, competitive access providers, Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    14. We have included small incumbent LECs in this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a “small business” under the RFA is one that, 
                    <E T="03">inter alia,</E>
                     meets the pertinent small-business size standard (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees) and “is not dominant in its field of operation.” The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not “national” in scope. We have therefore included small incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
                </P>
                <P>
                    15. 
                    <E T="03">Interexchange Carriers (IXCs).</E>
                     Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition for Interexchange Carriers. The closest NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The applicable size standard under SBA rules is that such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 indicate that 3,117 firms operated for the entire year. Of that number, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. According to internally developed Commission data, 359 companies reported that their primary telecommunications service activity was the provision of interexchange services. Of this total, an estimated 317 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of interexchange service providers are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    16. 
                    <E T="03">Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard).</E>
                     The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is “a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than one percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.” As of 2018, there were approximately 50,504,624 cable video subscribers in the United States. Accordingly, an operator serving fewer than 505,046 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based on available data, we find that all but six incumbent cable operators are small entities under this size standard. We note that the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million. Therefore, we are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the definition in the Communications Act.
                </P>
                <P>
                    17. 
                    <E T="03">Cable Companies and Systems (Rate Regulation).</E>
                     The Commission has also developed its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a “small cable company” is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers nationwide. Industry data indicate that there are 4,600 active cable systems in the United States. Of this total, all but seven cable operators nationwide are small under the 400,000-subscriber size standard. In addition, under the Commission's rate regulation rules, a “small system” is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. Commission records show 4,600 cable systems nationwide. Of this total, 3,900 cable systems have fewer than 15,000 subscribers, and 700 systems have 15,000 or more subscribers, based on the same records. Thus, under this standard as well, we estimate that most cable systems are small entities.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Wireless Carriers</HD>
                <P>
                    18. 
                    <E T="03">Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite).</E>
                     This industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is that such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this industry, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were 967 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 955 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees and 12 had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under this category and the associated size standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless telecommunications carriers (except satellite) are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    19. The Commission's own data—available in its Universal Licensing System—indicate that, as of August 31, 2018, there are 265 Cellular licensees that will be affected by our actions today. The Commission does not know how many of these licensees are small, as the Commission does not collect that information for these types of entities. Similarly, according to internally developed Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, Personal Communications Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) Telephony services. Of this total, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer employees, and 152 have more than 1,500 employees. Thus, using available 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35409"/>
                    data, we estimate that the majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
                </P>
                <P>
                    20. 
                    <E T="03">Satellite Telecommunications.</E>
                     This category comprises firms “primarily engaged in providing telecommunications services to other establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.” Satellite telecommunications service providers include satellite and earth station operators. The category has a small business size standard of $32.5 million or less in average annual receipts, under SBA rules. For this category, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were a total of 333 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 299 firms had annual receipts of less than $25 million. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of satellite telecommunications providers are small entities.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Resellers</HD>
                <P>
                    21. 
                    <E T="03">Local Resellers.</E>
                     The SBA has not developed a small business size standard specifically for Local Resellers. The SBA category of Telecommunications Resellers is the closest NAICs code category for local resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry. Under the SBA's size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, all operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small-business size standard, the majority of these resellers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 213 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of these, an estimated 211 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of Local Resellers are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    22. 
                    <E T="03">Toll Resellers.</E>
                     The Commission has not developed a definition for Toll Resellers. The closest NAICS Code category is Telecommunications Resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small-business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,341 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small-business size standard, the majority of these resellers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 881 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of this total, an estimated 857 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of toll resellers are small entities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    23. 
                    <E T="03">Prepaid Calling Card Providers.</E>
                     Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business definition specifically for prepaid calling card providers. The most appropriate NAICS code-based category for defining prepaid calling card providers is Telecommunications Resellers. This industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, all operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of these prepaid calling card providers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 193 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. All 193 carriers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may be affected by these rules.
                </P>
                <P>
                    24. 
                    <E T="03">Telecommunications Resellers.</E>
                     The Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,341 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of these resellers can be considered small entities.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Other Entities</HD>
                <P>
                    25. 
                    <E T="03">All Other Telecommunications.</E>
                     The “All Other Telecommunications” category is comprised of establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Establishments providing internet services or voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications connections are also included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small-business size standard for All Other Telecommunications, which consists of all such firms with annual receipts of $35 million or less. For this category, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 shows that there were 1,442 firms that operated for the entire year. Of those firms, a total of 1,400 had annual 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35410"/>
                    receipts less than $25 million and 42 firms had annual receipts of $25 million to $49,999,999. Thus, the Commission estimates that the majority of “All Other Telecommunications” firms potentially affected by our action can be considered small.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities</HD>
                <P>26. New or additional reporting, recordkeeping and/or other compliance obligations for small entities and other providers may result from the rules the Commission ultimately adopts in this proceeding. The TRACED Act mandates widespread implementation of STIR/SHAKEN, a technology that enables voice service providers to verify that the caller ID information transmitted with a particular call matches the caller's number, but also contemplates that some voice service providers facing barriers to implementation may be granted a delay of compliance. The TRACED Act requires the Commission to take action if the registered consortium identifies a provider of voice service that is subject to a delay of compliance as repeatedly originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns. Once a provider is so identified, the Commission must require such a provider to take action to ensure that such provider does not continue to originate such calls and make reasonable efforts to minimize the burden of any robocall mitigation. . . . which may include prescribing certain specific robocall mitigation practices for providers of voice service that have repeatedly originated large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns. One of the potential practices we raise and seek comment on in the Further Notice to fulfill these obligations would require voice service providers that the registered consortium identifies as originating large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns to submit a compliance plan and file periodic reports on its efforts to conform to that plan to ensure that these providers do not continue to originate such calls. Another potential practice would require identified voice service providers to implement know-your-customer obligations and report the contact information for each of its customers to the registered consortium or the Commission. The Further Notice also seeks comment on adopting a requirement for identified providers to implement internal measures to monitor the traffic transiting their networks to ensure that it is consistent with legitimate voice traffic and to act in response to aberrant patterns.</P>
                <P>27. If the Commission were to move forward with these potential requirements, certain voice service providers would have new reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance requirements. At this time however, the Commission cannot quantify the cost of compliance with these potential rule changes and compliance obligations for small entities and is not currently in a position to determine whether small entities will need to hire attorneys, engineers, consultants, or other professionals in order to comply. We expect the information we receive in comments including any cost and benefit analyses, to help the Commission identify and evaluate relevant matters for small entities, including compliance costs and other burdens that may result from the matters raised in the Further Notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered</HD>
                <P>28. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rules for such small entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small entities.</P>
                <P>
                    29. Pursuant to the requirements of the TRACED Act, the Commission is obligated to minimize burdens for small entities and other voice service providers associated with any robocall mitigation processes and procedures the Commission adopts. In the Further Notice we raise questions on the approach the Commission should take to address robocall mitigation such as should we prescribe specific robocall mitigation practices, and if so, what practices should we prescribe? Should we require the identified provider to submit a compliance plan and periodic reports on its efforts to conform to that plan? Should we propose that an identified provider make a point of contact available to the Commission, the consortium, and others and to respond to concerns within a specified period of time, such as 14 days? We seek comment on these matters, including the benefits and drawbacks of our approach. We also seek comment on how identified voice service providers will be impacted and welcome proposals on how to lessen that impact. In reaching our final conclusions and promulgating rules in this proceeding, the Commission expects to more fully consider the economic impact and any alternatives for small entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the 
                    <E T="03">Further Notice.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules</HD>
                <P>30. None.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Other Procedural Matters</HD>
                <P>
                    31. Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other filing in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meeting are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. In proceedings governed by section 1.49(f) of the Commission's rules or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable.pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35411"/>
                    themselves with the Commission's 
                    <E T="03">ex parte</E>
                     rules.
                </P>
                <P>
                    32. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis of 1995. The Further Notice contains proposed new information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, 
                    <E T="03">see</E>
                     44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on how we might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Ordering Clauses</HD>
                <P>
                    33. Accordingly, 
                    <E T="03">it is ordered,</E>
                     pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 227, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(1), 154(j), 227, and 303(r), and section 4(b)(5)(C) of the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act, Public Law  116-105, 133 Stat. 3274, that this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
                    <E T="03">is adopted</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <P>
                    34. 
                    <E T="03">It is further ordered,</E>
                     that a copy this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), SHALL be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA), and published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <FP>Federal Communications Commission.</FP>
                    <NAME>Cecilia Sigmund,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Federal Register Liaison Officer.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-10896 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6712-01-P</BILCOD>
        </PRORULE>
    </PRORULES>
    <VOL>85</VOL>
    <NO>112</NO>
    <DATE>Wednesday, June 10, 2020</DATE>
    <UNITNAME>Notices</UNITNAME>
    <NOTICES>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35412"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="F">COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Public Meeting of the California Advisory Committee</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Announcement of meeting.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the California Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held from 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. (Pacific) Wednesday, June 24, 2020. The purpose of the meeting will be for the Committee to ask questions of ICE regarding testimony received and to discuss the report writing process.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 from 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. PT.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">
                    <E T="03">Public Call Information:</E>
                </FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">
                    <E T="03">Dial:</E>
                     800-367-2403
                </FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">
                    <E T="03">Conference ID:</E>
                     2630628
                </FP>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at 
                        <E T="03">afortes@usccr.gov</E>
                         or (202) 681-0857.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-367-2403, conference ID number: 2630628. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.</P>
                <P>
                    Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012 or email Ana Victoria Fortes at 
                    <E T="03">afortes@usccr.gov.</E>
                     Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (202) 681-0857.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/FACAPublicViewCommitteeDetails?id=a10t0000001gzkUAAQ.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    Please click on “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, 
                    <E T="03">https://www.usccr.gov,</E>
                     or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Agenda</HD>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Welcome</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Discussion Regarding Report Writing</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. Q &amp; A with Dave Marin, Field Director of Los Angele ICE Field Office</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">IV. Next Steps</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">V. Adjournment</FP>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>David Mussatt,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12574 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Public Meeting of the Georgia Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Announcement of meeting.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Georgia Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via teleconference on Tuesday June 23, 2020, at 3:00 p.m. ET for the purpose of discussing civil rights concerns in the state.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The meeting will be held on Tuesday June 23, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. ET.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Public Call Information:</E>
                         (Audio only) Dial: 800-367-2403; Conference ID: 1664641.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Web Access Information:</E>
                         (Visual only) The online portion of the meeting may be accessed through the following link below: 
                        <E T="03">https://cc.readytalk.com/r/u5t2qyfwv4zn&amp;eom.</E>
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at 
                        <E T="03">mwojnaroski@usccr.gov</E>
                         or 202-618-4158.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll-free number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.</P>
                <P>
                    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Carolyn Allen at 
                    <E T="03">callen@usccr.gov</E>
                     in the Regional Program Unit Office/Advisory Committee Management Unit. Persons who desire additional information may contact the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35413"/>
                    Regional Program Unit may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at 202-618-4158.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via 
                    <E T="03">www.facadatabase.gov</E>
                     under the Commission on Civil Rights, Georgia Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, 
                    <E T="03">http://www.usccr.gov,</E>
                     or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or phone number.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Agenda</HD>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">Welcome and Roll Call</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">Discussion: Civil Rights in Georgia</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">Public Comment</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">Adjournment</FP>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>David Mussatt,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12531 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Public Meetings of the New Mexico Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Announcement of meetings.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the New Mexico Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a series of meetings via teleconference on Tuesday, June 23 and Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time for the purpose of discussing their wage theft and subminimum wage project.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The meetings will be held on:</P>
                </DATES>
                <P>• Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time</P>
                <P>• Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time</P>
                <P>Public Call Information: Dial: 888-394-8218, Conference ID: 3381995.</P>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Brooke Peery, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), at 
                        <E T="03">bpeery@usccr.gov</E>
                         or (202) 701-1376.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Members of the public may listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll free number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.</P>
                <P>
                    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 N. Los Angeles St., Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012. They may also be emailed to Brooke Peery at 
                    <E T="03">bpeery@usccr.gov.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available at: 
                    <E T="03">https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/FACAPublicViewCommitteeDetails?id=a10t0000001gzlGAAQ.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, 
                    <E T="03">http://www.usccr.gov,</E>
                     or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or street address.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Agenda:</HD>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Welcome &amp; Roll Call</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Approval of Minutes</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. Discussion on Testimony Received</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">IV. Planning for Future Panels</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">V. Public Comment</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">VI. Adjournment</FP>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>David Mussatt,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12532 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the North Dakota Advisory Committee</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Commission on Civil Rights.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Announcement of meeting.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that briefing of the North Dakota Advisory Committee to the Commission will be held on Tuesday, June 30, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. (CDT). The purpose of the briefing is to hear from presenters on fair housing issues in North Dakota.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Tuesday, June 30, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. (CDT).</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Public Call-In Information:</E>
                         1-800-367-2403; conference ID: 5743407.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">TDD:</E>
                         Dial Federal Relay Service  1-800-877-8339 and give the operator the above numbers.
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Evelyn Bohor, at 
                        <E T="03">ebohor@usccr.gov</E>
                         or by phone at (202) 376-7533.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-800-367-2403; conference ID: 5743407. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.</P>
                <P>Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at  1-800-877-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-800-367-2403; conference ID: 5743407.</P>
                <P>
                    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meeting or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Evelyn Bohor at 
                    <E T="03">ebohor@usccr.gov.</E>
                     Persons who desire additional information may contact Evelyn Bohor at 202-381-8915.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35414"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at this FACA link; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Western Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, 
                    <E T="03">www.usccr.gov,</E>
                     or to contact the agency at the above phone number or email address.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Agenda: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. (CDT)</HD>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Roll call</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Panel One for Fair Housing Project</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Open Comment</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Next Steps</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Other Business</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">• Adjourn</FP>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>David Mussatt,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12576 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>International Trade Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[A-570-992]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Monosodium Glutamate From the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-2019</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on monosodium glutamate (MSG) from the People's Republic of China (China) for the period November 1, 2018 through October 31, 2019.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Applicable June 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Leo Ayala or Kathryn Wallace, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; Telephone: (202) 482-3945 or (202) 482-6251, respectively.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <P>
                    On November 1, 2019, Commerce published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on monosodium glutamate (MSG) from China for the period November 1, 2018, through October 31, 2019.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On November 27, 2019, the petitioner 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     filed a timely request for review with respect to the China-wide entity and of entries from certain exporters comprising that entity.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Based on this request, on January 17, 2020, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), Commerce published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     a notice of initiation of an administrative review covering the period November 1, 2018, through October 31, 2019.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On February 19, 2020, the petitioner submitted a timely request to withdraw its request for administrative review of the antidumping duty order on MSG from China for all exporters for which it requested a review.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review,</E>
                         84 FR 58690 (November 1, 2019).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         The petitioner is Ajinomoto Health &amp; Nutrition North America, Inc.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Petitioner's Letter, “MSG from China: Request for Administrative Review,” dated November 27, 2019 at Attachment A.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews,</E>
                         85 FR 3014 (January 17, 2020) (
                        <E T="03">Initiation Notice</E>
                        ).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Petitioner's Letter, “MSG from China: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review” dated February 19, 2020.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Rescission of Review</HD>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested the review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, the petitioner fully withdrew its review request by the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order. As such, Commerce is in receipt of a timely request for withdrawal of this administrative review with respect to all companies listed in the 
                    <E T="03">Initiation Notices.</E>
                     Accordingly, we are rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on MSG from China for the period November 1, 2018, through October 31, 2019, in its entirety.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Assessment</HD>
                <P>
                    Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of MSG from China at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Notification to Importers</HD>
                <P>This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order</HD>
                <P>This notice serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the 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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Notification to Interested Parties</HD>
                <P>This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 2, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>James Maeder,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12563 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35415"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>International Trade Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[C-570-128]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Mattresses From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Applicable June 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Theodore Pearson, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2631.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 20, 2020, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated a countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of imports of mattresses from the People's Republic of China.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than June 24, 2020.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See Mattresses from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation,</E>
                         85 FR 22998 (April 24, 2020).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Postponement of Preliminary Determination</HD>
                <P>
                    Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in a CVD investigation within 65 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 703(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the “petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request.” Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         19 CFR 351.205(e).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On May 21, 2020, the petitioners 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary CVD determination.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The petitioners request postponement because the petitioners “will not have an opportunity to submit rebuttal factual information and {Commerce} will not have adequate time to review the data provided in the questionnaire responses and issue supplemental questionnaires prior to its issuance of a preliminary determination.” 
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioners have stated the reasons for requesting a postponement of the preliminary determination, and Commerce finds no compelling reason to deny the request. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination to no later than 130 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated, 
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     August 28, 2020. Pursuant to section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Brooklyn Bedding, Corsicana Mattress Company, Elite Comfort Solutions, FXI, Inc., Innocor, Inc., Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc., Leggett &amp; Platt, Incorporated, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO (USW) (collectively, the petitioners).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Petitioners' Letter, “Mattresses from China: Request to Extend CVD Preliminary Determination,” dated May 21, 2020.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Notification to Interested Parties</HD>
                <P>This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Jeffrey I. Kessler,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12562 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>International Trade Administration</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Review: Notice of NAFTA Final Panel Decision and Order</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>United States Section, NAFTA Secretariat, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of NAFTA Final Binational Panel Decision and Order in the matter of Softwood Lumber Injury from Canada (Secretariat File Number: USA-CDA-2018-1904-03).</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>On May 22, 2020, the Binational Panel issued its Final Decision and Order in the matter of Softwood Lumber Injury from Canada (Determination on Remand). The Binational Panel affirmed the United States International Trade Commission's Determination on Remand.</P>
                </SUM>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Paul E. Morris, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Room 2061, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482-5438, 
                        <E T="03">tradeagreementssecretariat@trade.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    Chapter 19 of Article 1904 of NAFTA provides a dispute settlement mechanism involving trade remedy determinations issued by the Government of the United States, the Government of Canada, and the Government of Mexico. Following a Request for Panel Review, a Binational Panel is composed to review the trade remedy determination being challenged and issue a binding Panel Decision. There are established 
                    <E T="03">NAFTA Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews (Rules)</E>
                     and the NAFTA Panel Decision has been notified in accordance with Rule 70. For the complete 
                    <E T="03">Rules</E>
                     and access to the Final Panel Decision and Order, please see 
                    <E T="03">https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org.</E>
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Paul E. Morris,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12511 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</SUBAGY>
                <RIN>RTID 0648-XA223</RIN>
                <SUBJECT>Marine Mammals; File No. 21585</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice; receipt of application for permit amendment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given that Oregon State University, Marine Mammal Institute, 2030 Southeast Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 97365 (Responsible Party: Bruce Mate, Ph.D.)., has applied for an amendment to Scientific Research Permit No. 21585.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35416"/>
                        Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, 
                        <E T="03">https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov,</E>
                         and then selecting File No. 21585 from the list of available applications. These documents are also available upon written request via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Written comments on this application should be submitted via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov.</E>
                         Please include File No. 21585 in the subject line of the email comment. Alternatively, comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401 or by facsimile to (301) 713-0376.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov</E>
                         or 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.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Shasta McClenahan or Amy Hapeman, (301) 427-8401.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    The subject amendment to Permit No. 21585 is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ), the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226), and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ).
                </P>
                <P>
                    Permit No. 21585, issued on December 20, 2018 (84 FR 4441, February 15, 2019), authorizes the permit holder to conduct research on 67 species of marine mammals including the following endangered or threatened species and stocks of cetaceans: Blue (
                    <E T="03">Balaenoptera musculus</E>
                    ), bowhead (
                    <E T="03">Balaena mysticetes</E>
                    ), Cook Inlet beluga (
                    <E T="03">Delphinapterus leucas</E>
                    ), fin (
                    <E T="03">B. physalus</E>
                    ), gray (
                    <E T="03">Eschrichtius robustus</E>
                    ), humpback (
                    <E T="03">Megaptera novaeangliae</E>
                    ), Main Hawaiian Islands insular false killer (
                    <E T="03">Pseudorca crassidens</E>
                    ), North Pacific right (
                    <E T="03">Eubalaena japonica</E>
                    ), sei (
                    <E T="03">B. borealis</E>
                    ), Southern Resident killer (
                    <E T="03">Orcinus orca</E>
                    ), Southern right (
                    <E T="03">E. australis</E>
                    ), and sperm (
                    <E T="03">Physeter macrocephalus</E>
                    ) whales. Authorized research may occur during vessel and manned aerial surveys for Level B harassment activities including observation, photography, passive acoustic recording, echosounders for prey mapping, and collection of sloughed skin. The permit also authorizes Level A harassment activities including biopsy sampling and deep-implant tagging. The permit holder is requesting the permit be amended to increase the permitted takes from 500 to 900 annually for the Level B harassment activities for humpback whales. No changes to the permitted objectives, methods, or Level A harassment activities are proposed. The permit expires on December 31, 2023.
                </P>
                <P>
                    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    , NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Julia Marie Harrison,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12497 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3510-22-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[RTID 0648-XA220]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Marine Mammals; File No. 23923</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice; receipt of application.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Notice is hereby given that Eugene DeRango, Bielefeld University, Department of Animal Behaviour, Morgenbreede 45, Bielefeld, Germany 33615, has applied in due form for a permit to import parts from Galapagos sea lions (
                        <E T="03">Zalophus wollebaeki</E>
                        ) for scientific research.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, 
                        <E T="03">https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov,</E>
                         and then selecting File No. 23923 from the list of available applications. These documents are also available upon written request via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Written comments on this application should be submitted via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov.</E>
                         Please include File No. 23923 in the subject line of the email comment. Alternatively, comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401 or by facsimile to (301) 713-0376.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request via email to 
                        <E T="03">NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov</E>
                         or 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.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Shasta McClenahan or Carrie Hubard, (301) 427-8401.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ) and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).
                </P>
                <P>The applicant proposes to import biological samples from Ecuador from up to 150 Galapagos sea lions annually for scientific research to understand how these sea lions cope with increased stressors on behavioral and physiological levels. The requested duration of the permit is 5 years.</P>
                <P>
                    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 
                    <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    ), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    , NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35417"/>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Julia Marie Harrison,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12496 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3510-22-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. CFPB-2020-0018]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice and request for comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is publishing this notice seeking comment on a Generic Information Collection titled, “Account Level Data Collection from PACE Program Administrators” under the Generic Information Collection Plan titled, “Generic Information Collection Plan for Information on Compliance Costs and Other Effects of Regulations” prior to requesting the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB's) approval of this collection.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before July 10, 2020 to be assured of consideration.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Electronic:</E>
                         Go to 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Email: PRA_Comments@cfpb.gov.</E>
                         Include Docket No. CFPB-2020-0018 in the subject line of the message.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:</E>
                         Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.
                    </P>
                    <P>Please note that due to circumstances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bureau discourages the submission of comments by mail, hand delivery, or courier. Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at 
                        <E T="03">www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Requests for additional information should be directed to Darrin King, PRA Officer, at (202) 435-9575, or email: 
                        <E T="03">CFPB_PRA@cfpb.gov.</E>
                         If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact 
                        <E T="03">CFPB_Accessibility@cfpb.gov.</E>
                         Please do not submit comments to these email boxes.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title of Collection:</E>
                     Account Level Data Collection from PACE Program Administrators.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     3170-0032.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Request for approval of a Generic Information Collection under an existing Generic Information Collection Plan.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Private and Public sector PACE loan providers.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Respondents:</E>
                     8.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     320.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     Section 307 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act mandates that the Bureau prescribe certain regulations relating to Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing. In order to better understand the PACE financing market and the unique nature of PACE financing, the Bureau issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on March 4, 2019. To further inform the development of the Bureau's proposed PACE rulemaking, the Bureau is requesting that PACE providers respond to a voluntary request for information relating to PACE applications and assessments.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Request for Comments:</E>
                     The Bureau is publishing this notice and soliciting comments on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Note that although the Bureau is requesting comments at this time, the Bureau will not proceed with the collection or request any responses until such time as the Bureau determines it will not impose an undue burden on respondents as they respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be submitted to OMB as part of its review of this request. All comments will become a matter of public record.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Darrin King,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12508 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; President's Volunteer Service Awards (PVSA), Parts A, B, C, D, and E</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Corporation for National and Community Service.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of information collection; request for comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled President's Volunteer Service Awards (PVSA), Parts A, B, C, D, and E for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the 
                        <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                         section by July 10, 2020.
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this Notice to the Attention: CNCS Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Provide written comments within 30 days of Notice publication.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, David Premo, at 202-606-6717 or by email to 
                        <E T="03">dpremo@cns.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:</P>
                <P>
                    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;
                    <PRTPAGE P="35418"/>
                </P>
                <P>• 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;</P>
                <P>• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and</P>
                <P>• Propose 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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on Wednesday, July 31, 2019 at Vol. 84, No 147. This comment period ended September 30, 2019. No responsive public comments were received from this Notice.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title of Collection:</E>
                     President's Volunteer Service Awards, Parts A, B, C, D, and E.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     3045-0086. 
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Renewal.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Respondents/Affected Public:</E>
                     All citizens of the United States.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses:</E>
                     200,000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     66,666 hours (average 20 minutes per response).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The President's Volunteer Service Awards are administered by CNCS per Executive Order 13285 and were established to recognize individuals, schools, and organizations that excel in efforts to support volunteer service and civic participation, especially with respect to students in primary schools, secondary schools, and institutions of higher learning.The information collected will be used to identify recipients of the President's Volunteer Service Awards. The information is collected electronically using a web-based system administered by contractor to CNCS. CNCS seeks to renew the current information collection.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Rhonda Taylor,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Director of Partnerships and Program Engagement.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12526 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6050-28-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">U.S. INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[DFC-014]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Submission for OMB Review</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of information collection; emergency clearance.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is submitting a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for emergency review and clearance of a new information collection request under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>DFC intends to begin use of this collection immediately.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Requests for copies of the subject information collection may be sent by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Joanna Reynolds, Agency Submitting Officer, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, 1100 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20527.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Email: fedreg@opic.gov</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Instructions:</E>
                         All submissions received must include the agency name and agency form number or OMB form number for this information collection. Electronic submissions must include the agency form number in the subject line to ensure proper routing. Please note that all written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Agency Submitting Officer: Joanna Reynolds, (202) 357-3979.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is seeking emergency clearance from OMB on a new information collection titled DFC-014, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation—Defense Production Act Loan Application (DFC-DPA Loan Application). Executive Order 13922, “Delegating Authority Under the Defense Production Act to the Chief Executive Officer of the United States International Development Finance Corporation To Respond to the COVID-19 Outbreak,” 85 FR 30583, delegated the authority to make loans, make provision for purchases and commitments to purchase, and take additional actions to create, maintain, protect, expand, and restore the domestic industrial base capabilities, including supply chains under the Defense Production Act (DPA) to the Chief Executive Officer of the DFC in order to help address the national emergency caused by COVID-19.</P>
                <P>Emergency clearance is necessary because the time to comply with the public comment provisions of the PRA would prevent the agency from quickly and efficiently responding to a national emergency. The information required by this collection is substantially similar to the information collected in DFC's other currently approved finance applications, OMB 3015-0004 and OMB 3015-0006. Furthermore, the agency intends to use this emergency clearance period to allow it to begin assistance under the DPA while initiating a request for a regular clearance that will provide the full public comment period.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Summary Form Under Review</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title of Collection:</E>
                     U.S. International Development Finance Corporation—Defense Production Act Loan Application (DFC-DPA Loan Application).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     New information collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Agency Form Number:</E>
                     DFC-014.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Form Number:</E>
                     Not assigned, new information collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Frequency:</E>
                     Once per applicant per loan.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; individuals.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Number of Respondents:</E>
                     100.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Time per Respondent:</E>
                     1.5 hours.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     150 hours.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The DFC-DPA Loan Application will be the principal document used by DFC to determine the applicant's eligibility for financing under the DPA and will collect information for financial underwriting analysis.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Nichole Skoyles,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Administrative Counsel, Office of the General Counsel.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12533 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 3210-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Department of the Air Force</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive Patent License</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of intent.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act and implementing regulations, the 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35419"/>
                        Department of the Air Force hereby gives notice of its intent to grant an exclusive patent license agreement to Temple University—Of The Commonwealth System Of Higher Education, having a place of business at 1801 N. Broad St, Conwell Hall Rm 401, Philadelphia, PA 19122.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written objections must be filed no later than fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of publication of this Notice.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Submit written objections to the Air Force Materiel Command Law Office, AFMCLO/JAZ, 2240 B Street, Room 260, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7109; Facsimile: (937) 255-3733; or Email: 
                        <E T="03">afmclo.jaz.tech@us.af.mil.</E>
                         Include Docket No. AFD 1870 in the subject line of the message.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Charles Figer, Air Force Materiel Command Law Office, AFMCLO/JAZ, 2240 B Street, Rm 260, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7109; Office: (937) 904-5032 ; Email: 
                        <E T="03">afmclo.jaz.tech@us.af.mil.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>The Department of the Air Force intends to grant the exclusive patent license agreement to consolidate rights with co-owner Temple University for the invention described in: Invention Disclosure entitled “Resource Allocation in Dual-Function</P>
                <P>Radar Comms Systems” as disclosed in Air Force Docket No. AFD 1944 and Temple University Docket No. C2019-021, the consolidation of rights is in the best interest of both owners in order to promote commercialization of the technology. The Department of the Air Force may grant the prospective license unless a timely objection is received that sufficiently shows the grant of the license would be inconsistent with the Bayh-Dole Act or implementing regulations. A competing application for a patent license agreement, completed in compliance with 37 CFR 404.8 and received by the Air Force within the period for timely objections, will be treated as an objection and may be considered as an alternative to the proposed license.</P>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                    <P>35 U.S.C. 209; 37 CFR 404.</P>
                </AUTH>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Adriane Paris,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12393 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 5001-10-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. ED-2020-SCC-0087]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Comprehensive Literacy Program Evaluation: Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD) Program Evaluation</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Department of Education (ED).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before August 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         by searching the Docket ID number ED-2020-SCC-0087. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. If the regulations.gov site is not available to the public for any reason, ED will temporarily accept comments at 
                        <E T="03">ICDocketMgr@ed.gov.</E>
                         Please include the docket ID number and the title of the information collection request when requesting documents or submitting comments. 
                        <E T="03">Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted.</E>
                         Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Strategic Collections and Clearance Governance and Strategy Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, LBJ, Room 6W-208B, Washington, DC 20202-4537.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Tracy Rimdzius, 202-245-7283.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, 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. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title of Collection:</E>
                     Comprehensive Literacy Program Evaluation: Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD) Program Evaluation.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     1850-0945.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     An extension of an existing information collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Respondents/Affected Public:</E>
                     State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Individuals or Households.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses:</E>
                     604.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     296.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The data collection described in this submission includes activities for the legislatively mandated evaluation of the Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD) Program. The evaluation will provide information on the implementation of the program and its impact on student reading achievement. The CLSD evaluation is the second component of an evaluation of the U.S. Department of Education's comprehensive literacy programs. An earlier clearance package (OMB control number 1850-0945) covered the first component of the evaluation—an implementation study of the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program (the precursor program to CLSD). The CLSD evaluation will include an examination of implementation, a randomized trial to estimate the impact of CLSD funding on teacher and student outcomes, and a longitudinal comparison of trends in achievement in CLSD and similar, non-CLSD schools. This package requests clearance for data collection associated with the implementation analyses, the randomized trial, and initial data 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35420"/>
                    collection for the comparisons of longitudinal trends. A separate package will be submitted at a later date for all remaining data collection activities for the comparisons of longitudinal trends, which will take place following the 2023-24 school year.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Stephanie Valentine,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>PRA Coordinator, Strategic Collections and Clearance, Governance and Strategy Division, Office of Chief Data Officer, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12502 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4000-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Combined Notice of Filings</SUBJECT>
                <P>Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP01-382-030.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Northern Natural Gas Company.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Northern Natural Gas Company submits Carlton Reimbursement Report under RP01-382.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/1/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200601-5171.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP20-939-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Rover Pipeline LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: Summary of Negotiated Rate Capacity Release Agreements on 6-2-20 to be effective 6/1/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/2/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200602-5016.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP20-940-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     National Fuel Resources, Inc., Marathon Power LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Joint Petition for Temporary Waivers of Capacity Release Regulations, et al. of National Fuel Resources, Inc., et al. under RP20-940.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/2/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200602-5156.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/9/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP20-941-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Elba Express Company, L.L.C.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: Change to Fuel Tracker Effective Date to be effective 8/1/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5004.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP20-942-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     NiSource Inc., Bay State Gas Company, Eversource Energy, Eversource Gas Company of Massachusetts.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Joint Petition for Temporary Waivers of Capacity Release Regulations, et al. of NiSource Inc., et al. under RP20-942.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/2/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200602-5172.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     RP20-943-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: TCO WBX WGL Negotiated Rate Agreement Amendments to be effective 11/16/2018.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5095.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.
                </P>
                <P>The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.</P>
                <P>Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.</P>
                <P>
                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: 
                    <E T="03">http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf.</E>
                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12544 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 6717-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Project No. 14795-002]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Shell Energy North America (US), L. P.; Notice of Teleconference</SUBJECT>
                <P>
                    a. 
                    <E T="03">Project Name and Number:</E>
                     Pearl Hill Hydro Battery Pumped Storage Project No. 14795-002.
                </P>
                <P>
                    b. 
                    <E T="03">Applicant:</E>
                     Shell Energy North America (US), L. P.
                </P>
                <P>
                    c.
                    <E T="03"> Date and Time of Teleconference:</E>
                     June 23, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. EDT.
                </P>
                <P>
                    d. 
                    <E T="03">FERC Contact:</E>
                     Suzanne Novak, (202) 502-6665, 
                    <E T="03">suzanne.novak@ferc.gov</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <P>
                    e. 
                    <E T="03">Purpose of Meeting:</E>
                     Commission staff will hold a teleconference with staff from the Washington State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Advisory Council) staff, the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CTCR), Shell Energy North America (US), L. P. (Shell Energy), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle Division, (Corps) to discuss the Programmatic Agreement for the licensing of the Pearl Hill Hydro Battery Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project.
                </P>
                <P>
                    f. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other interested parties are invited to attend by phone; however, participation will be limited to representation of the Washington SHPO, the Advisory Council, CTCR, Shell Energy, the Corps, and the Commission's representatives. Please call or email Suzanne Novak at (202) 502-6665 or 
                    <E T="03">suzanne.novak@ferc.gov</E>
                     by June 16, 2020 at 4:30 EDT, to RSVP and to receive specific instructions on how to participate.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Kimberly D. Bose,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12579 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6717-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. AC20-127-000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Edison Electric Institute; American Gas Association; Interstate Natural Gas Association of America</SUBJECT>
                <P>Take notice that on May 29, 2020, Edison Electric Institute, American Gas Association, and Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (collectively, the Associations) submitted a request for expedited approval for the Associations' member companies to elect a temporary modification of the formula prescribed by the Commission's Uniform System of Accounts for calculating the allowance for funds used during construction rate for the 12-month period beginning March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 Emergency.</P>
                <P>
                    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35421"/>
                    appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at 
                    <E T="03">http://www.ferc.gov.</E>
                     Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
                </P>
                <P>
                    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    , the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through the Commission's Home Page (
                    <E T="03">http://ferc.gov</E>
                    ) using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at 
                    <E T="03">FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov</E>
                     or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comment Date:</E>
                     5 p.m. Eastern Time on June 11, 2020.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Kimberly D. Bose,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12578 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6717-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Combined Notice of Filings #1</SUBJECT>
                <P>Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1668-001.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Tariff Amendment: LGIP Modification Date Extension to be effective 6/28/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5054.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1975-001.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Southern California Edison Company.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Tariff Amendment: Correction to Notice of Termination of GIA &amp; DSA SA Nos. 875 and 876 to be effective 6/4/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5107.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/24/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1985-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Northern Colorado Wind Energy Center, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Baseline eTariff Filing: Northern Colorado Wind Energy Center, LLC MBR Application to be effective 7/23/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5144.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/24/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1986-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Day County Wind I, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Baseline eTariff Filing: Day County Wind I, LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 8/3/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5145.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/24/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1987-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Cerro Gordo Wind, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Baseline eTariff Filing: Cerro Gordo Wind, LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 8/3/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1988-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Northern Colorado Wind Energy Center II, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Baseline eTariff Filing: Northern Colorado Wind Energy Center II, LLC MBR Application to be effective 7/24/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5056.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1989-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     California Independent System Operator Corporation.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-06-04 Certificate of Concurrence—LGIA among Luz Solar, SCE &amp; CAISO to be effective 5/30/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5087.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1990-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     § 205(d) Rate Filing: DEP-PEMC Wholesale Contract Revisions to Rate Schedule No. 172 to be effective 6/1/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5088.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ER20-1991-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Ponderosa Wind, LLC.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Baseline eTariff Filing: Ponderosa Wind, LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 8/4/2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/4/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200604-5096.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/25/20.
                </P>
                <P>Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Docket Numbers:</E>
                     ES20-42-000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Applicants:</E>
                     Consumers Energy Company.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Description:</E>
                     Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Authorization to Issue Securities of Consumers Energy Company.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Filed Date:</E>
                     6/3/20.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Accession Number:</E>
                     20200603-5158.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     5 p.m. ET 6/24/20.
                </P>
                <P>The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.</P>
                <P>Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.</P>
                <P>
                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: 
                    <E T="03">http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf.</E>
                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12543 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 6717-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket Nos. CP20-468-000; CP20-474-000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, Central Kentucky Transmission Company; Notice of Applications</SUBJECT>
                <P>
                    Take notice that on May 29, 2020, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia), 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 700, Houston, Texas 77002-2700, filed in Docket No. CP20-468-000 an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35422"/>
                    of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to acquire by purchase of: (1) Central Kentucky Transmission Company's (Central Kentucky) 25 percent undivided interest in the KA-1 North Facilities and related facilities in Fayette and Madison Counties, Kentucky; and (2) the associated capacity totaling 28,000 dekatherms per day. Columbia states that the subject facilities total approximately 28.6 miles of pipeline and the acquisition has a de minimus cost.
                </P>
                <P>Additionally, on June 3, 2020, Central Kentucky, 2001 Mercer Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40511, filed in Docket No. CP20-474-000 an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the NGA and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to: (1) Abandon by sale to Columbia its interest in the KA-1 North Facilities and related facilities; (2) abandon all services and work performed under its blanket certificates; (3) terminate its blanket certificates; (4) cancel its FERC Gas Tariff; and (5) waiver of section 201 accounting and reporting requirements, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.</P>
                <P>
                    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    , the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through the Commission's Home Page (
                    <E T="03">http://ferc.gov</E>
                    ) using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at 
                    <E T="03">FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov</E>
                     or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Any questions concerning Columbia's application may be directed to Richard Bralow, Sr., Legal Counsel, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 700, Houston, Texas 77002-2700, by telephone at (832) 320-5177 or by email at 
                    <E T="03">richard_bralow@tcenergy.com.</E>
                     Any questions concerning Central Kentucky's application may be directed to Kenneth W. Christman, Assistant General Counsel, 121 Champion Way, Suite 100, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317, by telephone at (724) 416-6315 or by email at 
                    <E T="03">kchrist@nisource.com.</E>
                </P>
                <P>Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9), within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.</P>
                <P>There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit five copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.</P>
                <P>However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.</P>
                <P>Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.</P>
                <P>
                    As of the February 27, 2018 date of the Commission's order in Docket No. CP16-4-001, the Commission will apply its revised practice concerning out-of-time motions to intervene in any new NGA section 3 or section 7 proceeding.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Persons desiring to become a party to a certificate proceeding are to intervene in a timely manner. If seeking to intervene out-of-time, the movant is required to show good cause why the time limitation should be waived, and should provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule 214(d)(1) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.,</E>
                         162 FERC 61,167 at 50 (2018).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         18 CFR 385.214(d)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at 
                    <E T="03">http://www.ferc.gov.</E>
                     Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Comment Date:</E>
                     5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on June 25, 2020.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Kimberly D. Bose,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12577 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6717-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35423"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[FRL-10010-25-Region 5]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Public Water System Supervision Program Approval for the State of Michigan</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of tentative approval.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has tentatively approved a revision to the state of Michigan's Public Water System Supervision Program under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) by adopting the Revised Total Coliform Rule. The EPA has determined this revision is no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulation. Therefore, the EPA intends to approve this revision to the state of Michigan's Public Water System Supervision Program, thereby giving Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy primary enforcement responsibility for this regulation. This approval action does not extend to public water systems in Indian Country. By approving this rule, EPA does not intend to affect the rights of federally recognized Indian Tribes in Michigan, nor does it intend to limit existing rights of the state of Michigan.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Any interested party may request a public hearing on this determination. A request for a public hearing must be submitted by July 10, 2020. The EPA Region 5 Administrator may deny frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing is made by July 10, 2020, EPA Region 5 will hold a public hearing, and a notice of such hearing will be published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         and a newspaper of general circulation. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following information: the name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and a brief statement of the information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and the signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.
                    </P>
                    <P>If EPA Region 5 does not receive a timely and appropriate request for a hearing and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, this determination shall become final and effective on July 10, 2020 and no further public notice will be issued.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection at the following offices between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for official holidays and unless the offices are closed due to COVID 19: Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Drinking Water and Environmental Health Division, 525 W Allegan, Constitution Hall 4th floor, Lansing, MI 48909-7741; and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5, Ground Water and Drinking Water Branch (WG-15J), 77 W Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604. Requestors can email Jennifer Kurtz Crooks, 
                        <E T="03">crooks.jennifer@epa.gov,</E>
                         to receive documents related to this determination in the case of office closures.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Jennifer Kurtz Crooks, EPA Region 5, Ground Water and Drinking Water Branch, at the address given above, by telephone at 312-886-0244, or at 
                        <E T="03">crooks.jennifer@epa.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority: </HD>
                        <P>Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300g-2, and the federal regulations implementing Section 1413 of the Act set forth at 40 CFR part 142.</P>
                    </AUTH>
                    <SIG>
                        <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                        <NAME>Kurt Thiede,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Regional Administrator, Region 5.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12539 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6560-50-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[FRS 16825]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Sunshine Act Meeting</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 2, 2020.</DATE>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">TIME AND DATE:</HD>
                    <P> Open Commission Meeting, Tuesday, June 9, 2020.</P>
                    <P>The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, which is scheduled to commence at 10:30 a.m.</P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PLACE:</HD>
                    <P>
                         Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic and related agency telework and headquarters access policies, this meeting will be in a wholly electronic format and will be open to the public on the internet via live feed from the FCC's web page at 
                        <E T="03">www.fcc.gov/live</E>
                         and on the FCC's YouTube channel.
                    </P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">STATUS:</HD>
                    <P> Open to the public.</P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:</HD>
                    <P/>
                </PREAMHD>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="3" OPTS="L2,tp0,i1" CDEF="xs54,r80,r150">
                    <TTITLE> </TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Item No.</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Bureau</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Subject</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1</ENT>
                        <ENT>WIRELINE COMPETITION &amp; ECONOMICS &amp; ANALYTICS</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Title:</E>
                             Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Final Auction Procedures (AU Docket No. 20-34; WC Docket No. 19-126; WC Docket No. 10-90)
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT O="xl"/>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Summary:</E>
                             The Commission will consider a Public Notice that would establish procedures for the Phase I auction of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (Auction 904), awarding up to $16 billion in support over 10 years for deployment of broadband in unserved areas.
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2</ENT>
                        <ENT>WIRELESS TELE-COMMUNICATION</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Title:</E>
                             Modernizing and Expanding Access to the 70/80/90 GHz Bands (WT Docket Nos. 20-133, 10-153, 15-244; RM-11824, RM-11825)
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT O="xl"/>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Summary:</E>
                             The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order that would explore innovative new uses of the 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz, 92-94 GHz, and 94.1-95 GHz bands, including potential rule changes to allow for the provision of wireless backhaul for 5G and the deployment of broadband services to aircraft and ships.
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">3</ENT>
                        <ENT>WIRELESS TELE-COMMUNICATION</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Title:</E>
                             State/Local Approval of Wireless Equipment Modifications (WT Docket No. 19-250; RM-11849)
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT O="xl"/>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Summary:</E>
                             The Commission will consider a Declaratory Ruling and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would clarify, and seek comment on changes to, the Commission's rules implementing section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act of 2012 in order to accelerate the deployment of communications infrastructure by facilitating the upgrade of existing sites for 5G networks.
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">4</ENT>
                        <ENT>MEDIA</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Title:</E>
                             Promoting Broadcast Internet Innovation through ATSC 3.0 (MB Docket No. 20-145)
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <PRTPAGE P="35424"/>
                        <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                        <ENT O="xl"/>
                        <ENT>
                            <E T="03">Summary:</E>
                             The Commission will consider a Declaratory Ruling that would remove regulatory uncertainty concerning use of Broadcast Internet services provided by broadcast TV licensees as an ancillary and supplementary service, and a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would seek comment on modifying and clarifying existing rules to promote the deployment of Broadcast Internet services as part of the transition to ATSC 3.0.
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    The meeting will be webcast with open captioning at: 
                    <E T="03">www.fcc.gov/live.</E>
                     Open captioning will be provided as well as a text only version on the FCC website. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. In your request, include a description of the accommodation you will need and a way we can contact you if we need more information. Last minute requests will be accepted but may be impossible to fill. Send an email to: 
                    <E T="03">fcc504@fcc.gov</E>
                     or call the Consumer &amp; Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.
                </P>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:</HD>
                    <P>
                         Additional information concerning this meeting may be obtained from the Office of Media Relations, (202) 418-0500. Audio/Video coverage of the meeting will be broadcast live with open captioning over the internet from the FCC Live web page at 
                        <E T="03">www.fcc.gov/live.</E>
                    </P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <SIG>
                    <FP>Federal Communications Commission.</FP>
                    <NAME>Marlene Dortch,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12633 Filed 6-8-20; 11:15 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 6712-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[OMB Control No. 3090-XXXX; Docket No. 2020-0001; Sequence No. 3]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Information Collection; Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation)</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>General Services Administration.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice; request for comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The General Services Administration (GSA) as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, is announcing an opportunity for public comment on a new proposed collection of information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         concerning each proposed collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on new collection proposed by the Agency.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Submit comments on or before: August 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Submit comments identified by Information Collection 3090-XXXX, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation), to:
                        <E T="03"> https://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments to 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         will be posted to the docket unchanged. If your comment cannot be submitted using 
                        <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         call or email the points of contact in the 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                         section of this document for alternate instructions.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Instructions:</E>
                         Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 3090-XXXX, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation), in all correspondence related to this collection. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check 
                        <E T="03">regulations.gov,</E>
                         approximately two-to-three business days after submission to verify posting.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Requests for additional information should be directed to Camille Tucker, U.S. General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, via phone at 202-603-2666, or email to 
                        <E T="03">camille.tucker@gsa.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">A. Purpose</HD>
                <P>
                    Under the PRA, (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, GSA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.
                </P>
                <P>Whether seeking a loan, Social Security benefits, veterans benefits, or other services provided by the Federal Government, individuals and businesses expect Government customer services to be efficient and intuitive, just like services from leading private-sector organizations. Yet the 2016 American Consumer Satisfaction Index and the 2017 Forrester Federal Customer Experience Index show that, on average, Government services lag nine percentage points behind the private sector.</P>
                <P>A modern, streamlined and responsive customer experience means: Raising government-wide customer experience to the average of the private sector service industry; developing indicators for high-impact Federal programs to monitor progress towards excellent customer experience and mature digital services; and providing the structure (including increasing transparency) and resources to ensure customer experience is a focal point for agency leadership. To support this, OMB Circular A-11 Section 280 established government-wide standards for mature customer experience organizations in government and measurement. To enable Federal programs to deliver the experience taxpayers deserve, they must undertake three general categories of activities: Conduct ongoing customer research, gather and share customer feedback, and test services and digital products.</P>
                <P>
                    These data collection efforts may be either qualitative or quantitative in nature or may consist of mixed methods. Additionally, data may be collected via a variety of means, including but not limited to electronic or social media, direct or indirect observation (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     in person, video and audio collections), interviews, questionnaires, surveys, and focus groups. GSA will limit its inquiries to data collections that solicit strictly voluntary opinions or responses.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The results of the data collected will be used to improve the delivery of 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35425"/>
                    Federal services and programs. It will include the creation of personas, customer journey maps, and reports and summaries of customer feedback data and user insights. It will also provide government-wide data on customer experience that can be displayed on 
                    <E T="03">performance.gov</E>
                     to help build transparency and accountability of Federal programs to the customers they serve.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Method of Collection</HD>
                <P>GSA will collect this information by electronic means when possible, as well as by mail, fax, telephone, technical discussions, and in-person interviews. GSA may also utilize observational techniques to collect this information.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Data</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Form Number(s):</E>
                     None.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     New.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">B. Annual Reporting Burden</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Collections will be targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future. For the purposes of this request, “customers” are individuals, businesses, and organizations that interact with a Federal Government agency or program, either directly or via a Federal contractor. This could include individuals or households; businesses or other for-profit organizations; not-for-profit institutions; State, local or tribal governments; Federal government; and Universities.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Respondents:</E>
                     2,001,550.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Time per Response:</E>
                     Varied, dependent upon the data collection method used. The possible response time to complete a questionnaire or survey may be 3 minutes or up to 2 hours to participate in an interview.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     101,125.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public:</E>
                     $0.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">C. Public Comments</HD>
                <P>GSA invites comments on: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Beth Anne Killoran,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Chief Information Officer.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12560 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 6820-34-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        This notice announces the intention of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve the proposed information collection project: 
                        <E T="03">“Generic Clearance for Questionnaire and Data Collection Testing, Evaluation, and Research for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.”</E>
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments on this notice must be received by 60 days after date of publication of this notice.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Written comments should be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz, Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by email at 
                        <E T="03">doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1477, or by email at 
                        <E T="03">doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Project</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Generic Clearance for Questionnaire and Data Collection Testing, Evaluation, and Research for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</HD>
                <P>The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) requests that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reapprove generic pre-testing Clearance 0935-0124 for three years to facilitate AHRQ's efforts to (1) employ evaluation-type methods and techniques to improve AHRQ's current data collection and estimation procedures, (2) develop new collections and procedures, including toolkits, and (3) revise existing collections and procedures. AHRQ believes that developing, testing, and evaluating data collection and estimation procedures using survey methods and other techniques in anticipation of agency-sponsored studies can improve its information collection efforts, and the products it develops and allow AHRQ to be more responsive to fast-changing developments in the health care research field. AHRQ uses techniques to simplify data collection and estimation procedures, reduce respondent burden, and improve efficiencies to meet the needs of individuals and small business respondents who may have reduced budgets and staff.</P>
                <P>This clearance request is limited to research on data collection, toolkit development, and estimation procedures and reports and does not extend to the collection of data for public release or policy formation. The current Clearance (0935-0124) was granted on November 3, 2017, and expires on November 30, 2020.</P>
                <P>This generic clearance will allow AHRQ to draft and test toolkits, survey instruments and other data collection and estimation procedures more quickly and with greater lead time, thereby managing project time more efficiently and improving the quality of the data AHRQ collects. In some instances, the ability to test and evaluate toolkits, data collection and estimation procedures in anticipation of work or early in a project may result in the decision not to proceed with additional activities, which could save both public and private resources and eliminate respondent burden.</P>
                <P>This generic clearance will facilitate AHRQ's response to a changing environment. Many of the tools AHRQ develops are made available to the private sector to assist in improving health care quality. The health and health care environment changes rapidly and requires a quick response from AHRQ to provide refined tools.</P>
                <P>
                    These preliminary research activities will not be used by AHRQ to regulate or sanction its customers. They will be entirely voluntary and the confidentiality of respondents and their responses will be preserved. Proposed information collections submitted under this generic clearance will be submitted for review by OMB with a response expected in 14 days.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35426"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Method of Collection</HD>
                <P>The information collected through preliminary research activities under this generic clearance will be used by AHRQ to employ techniques to (1) improve AHRQ's current data collection and estimation procedures, (2) develop new collections and procedures, including toolkits, and (3) revise existing collections and procedures in anticipation or in response to changes in the health or health care field. The end result will be improvement in AHRQ's data collections and procedures and the quality of data collected, a reduction or minimization of respondent burden, increased agency efficiency, and improved responsiveness to the public.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Estimated Annual Respondent Burden</HD>
                <P>
                    Exhibit 1 shows the estimated burden hours, over the full three years of this clearance, for the respondents' time to participate in the research activities that may be conducted under this generic clearance. Mail surveys will be conducted with about 6,000 persons (2,000 per year for three years) and are estimated to average 20 minutes. Mail surveys may also be sent to respondents via email, and may include a telephone non-response follow-up. Telephone non-response follow-up for mailed surveys is not counted as a telephone survey in Exhibit 1. Not more than 600 persons, over three years, will participate in telephone surveys that will take about 40 minutes. Web-based surveys will be conducted with no more than 3,000 persons and will require no more than 10 minutes to complete. About 1,500 persons will participate in focus groups which may last up to two hours, while in-person interviews will be conducted with 600 persons and will take about 50 minutes. Automated data collection will be conducted for about 1,500 persons and could take up to 1 hour. Cognitive testing will be conducted with about 600 persons and is estimated to take 1
                    <FR>1/2</FR>
                     hours to complete. The total burden over three years is estimated to be 8,900 hours (about 2,967 hours per year).
                </P>
                <P>Exhibit 2 shows the estimated cost burden over three years, based on the respondents' time to participate in these research activities. The total cost burden is estimated to be $357,869.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,12,12,12">
                    <TTITLE>Exhibit 1—Estimated Burden Hours Over Three Years</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Type of information collection</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Number of 
                            <LI>respondents</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Number of 
                            <LI>responses per respondent</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Hours per 
                            <LI>response</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Total burden hours</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">
                            Mail/email 
                            <SU>*</SU>
                        </ENT>
                        <ENT>6,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>20/60</ENT>
                        <ENT>2,000</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Telephone</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>40/60</ENT>
                        <ENT>400</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Web-based</ENT>
                        <ENT>3,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>10/60</ENT>
                        <ENT>500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Focus Groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>2.0</ENT>
                        <ENT>3,000</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">In-person</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.0</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">
                            Automated 
                            <SU>**</SU>
                        </ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.0</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="n,s">
                        <ENT I="01">
                            Cognitive Testing 
                            <SU>***</SU>
                        </ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.5</ENT>
                        <ENT>900</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Totals</ENT>
                        <ENT>13,800</ENT>
                        <ENT>na</ENT>
                        <ENT>na</ENT>
                        <ENT>8,900</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <TNOTE>* May include telephone non-response follow-up in which case the burden will not change</TNOTE>
                    <TNOTE>** May include testing of database software, CAPI software or other automated technologies.</TNOTE>
                    <TNOTE>*** May include cognitive interviews for questionnaire or toolkit development, or “think aloud” testing of prototype websites.</TNOTE>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,12,12,12">
                    <TTITLE>Exhibit 2—Estimated Cost Burden Over Three Years</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Type of information collection</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Number of 
                            <LI>respondents</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Total burden hours</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Average 
                            <LI>hourly wage </LI>
                            <LI>rate *</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Total cost 
                            <LI>burden</LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Mail/email</ENT>
                        <ENT>6,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>2,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>$40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>$ 80,420</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Telephone</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>400</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>16,084</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Web-based</ENT>
                        <ENT>3,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>500</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>20,105</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Focus Groups</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                        <ENT>3,000</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>120,630</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">In-person</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>24,126</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Automated</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,500</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>60,315</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="n,s">
                        <ENT I="01">Cognitive Testing</ENT>
                        <ENT>600</ENT>
                        <ENT>900</ENT>
                        <ENT>40.21</ENT>
                        <ENT>36,189</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Totals</ENT>
                        <ENT>13,800</ENT>
                        <ENT>8,900</ENT>
                        <ENT>na</ENT>
                        <ENT>357,869</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <TNOTE>
                        * Bureau of Labor &amp; Statistics on “Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2019” found at the following URL: 
                        <E T="03">https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#b29-0000.htm</E>
                         for the respondents.
                    </TNOTE>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Request for Comments</HD>
                <P>In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested with regard to any of the following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ health care research and health care information dissemination functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information upon the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.</P>
                <P>Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35427"/>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Virginia L. Mackay-Smith,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Associate Director.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12565 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4160-90-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        This notice announces the intention of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve the proposed information collection project: “Evaluation of Learning Health Systems K12 Training Program.” This proposed information collection was previously published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on March 12, 2020, and allowed 60 days for public comment. No comments were received from the public during this period. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments on this notice must be received by 30 days after date of publication of this Notice.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to 
                        <E T="03">www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.</E>
                         Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1477, or by email at 
                        <E T="03">doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Project</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Evaluation of Learning Health Systems K12 Training Program</HD>
                <P>
                    AHRQ, in partnership with the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), supports an innovative institutional mentored career development program (K12) to train clinician and research scientists to conduct patient-centered outcomes research within learning health systems (LHSs). LHSs provide an environment where science generated from health services research, patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR), and clinical research; informatics; incentives; and culture are aligned for continuous improvement and innovation. In addition, in an LHS, best practices are seamlessly embedded in the care process, in which stakeholders (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     providers, patients, and families) are active participants in all elements, and new knowledge is captured as an integral by-product of the care experience. The following are the LHS K12 training program objectives:
                </P>
                <P>• Develop and implement a training program that includes both didactic and experiential learning and embeds the scholars in training at the interface of research, informatics, and clinical operations within LHSs.</P>
                <P>• Identify, recruit, and train clinician and research scientists who are committed to conducting PCOR in healthcare settings that generate new evidence to facilitate rapid implementation of practices that will improve quality of care and patient outcomes.</P>
                <P>• Establish Centers of Excellence (COEs) in LHS Research Training, focusing on the application and mastery of the newly developed core LHS researcher competencies.</P>
                <P>• Promote cross-institutional scholar-mentor interactions, cooperation on multisite projects, dissemination of project findings, methodological advances, and development of a shared curriculum.</P>
                <P>The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the overall achievement of the LHS K12 training program's objectives, outcomes, and impact, as well as the program's value to its stakeholders. The information collected through this data collection will allow AHRQ to improve the LHS K12 program and identify whether results correspond to intentional changes in program strategy and implementation.</P>
                <P>This study is being conducted by AHRQ through its contractor, 2M Research, pursuant to AHRQ's statutory authority to “build capacity for comparative clinical effectiveness research by establishing a grant program that provides for the training of researchers in the methods used to conduct such research.” 42 U.S.C. 299b-37(e).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Method of Collection</HD>
                <P>The evaluation will include two types of data collection: (1) Semi-structured interviews with scholars who are close to completing the LHS K12 training program, their health system advisors, and program directors of each of the 11 institutions; and (2) surveys with health system advisors. The proposed data collection spans three years (2020-2023).</P>
                <P>To achieve the goals of this project the following data collections will be implemented.</P>
                <P>1. Scholar Interview: Interviews with LHS K12 scholars assess the degree of scholar embeddedness in their respective health systems and query which aspects of the training program were most and least successful. Telephone interviews will be conducted one time with scholars who are currently enrolled but close to (within 2 to 3 months of) completing the LHS K12 training program. The total estimated number of scholars interviewed will be approximately up to 123 (or approximately 41 scholars annually).</P>
                <P>2. Health System Advisor Interview: Interviews with scholars' health system advisors assess the perceived value of the LHS K12 training program to the health system and the role of health system advisors in supporting the research conducted by LHS K12 scholars. One health system advisor from each scholar's advisory committee will be interviewed by telephone. Health system advisors selected for interviews will include those with direct involvement with or knowledge of the LHS K12 scholars' research projects. Health system advisors will be interviewed once around the same time that the scholar is interviewed. The total estimated number of health system advisors interviewed will be approximately up to 116 (or approximately 39 health system advisors annually).</P>
                <P>3. Program Director Interview: Interviews with LHS K12 program directors assess the perceived value of the LHS K12 training program to the health system and the role of health system advisors in supporting the LHS K12 training program. The program director of each of the grantee institutions participating in the LHS K12 program will be interviewed by telephone in the final year of the LHS K12 program. The total number of program directors interviewed will be 10 (or approximately 4 program directors annually).</P>
                <P>
                    4. Health System Advisor Survey: Pre-post surveys with scholars' health system advisors measure change in attitudes toward the role of health systems research and the importance of patient, family, and other stakeholder engagement in research. A brief survey will be administered electronically to health system advisors at two time points: Once at the beginning and conclusion of their respective scholar's 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35428"/>
                    training. The total number of health system advisors surveyed will be approximately up to 190 (or approximately 63 health system directors annually).
                </P>
                <P>AHRQ will use the information collected through this Information Collection Request to assess the program progress of the LHS K12 training program, and impact to its LHS stakeholders in a prospective manner. The information collected will facilitate program planning.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Estimated Annual Respondent Burden</HD>
                <P>Table 1 shows the estimated annualized burden hours required for respondents to participate in this evaluation. Interviews will be conducted with a total of 123 scholars, 116 health system advisors, and 10 program directors (approximately 41 scholars, 39 health system advisors, and 4 program directors each year). Each interview is expected to last approximately 60 minutes. Surveys will be conducted with a total of 190 health system advisors (or approximately 63 health system advisors each year). The survey is expected to take less than 10 minutes. The total hour burden is expected to be 284.13 hours (or approximately 94.71 hours each year) for this participant data collection effort.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,12,12,14">
                    <TTITLE>Table 1—Estimated Annualized Burden Hours</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Instrument</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Estimated number of 
                            <LI>respondents</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Frequency of response</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Average time per response 
                            <LI>(hours)</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Total annual 
                            <LI>burden estimate </LI>
                            <LI>(hours)</LI>
                        </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Scholar Interviews</ENT>
                        <ENT>41</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>41.00</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Health System Advisor Interviews</ENT>
                        <ENT>39</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>39.00</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Program Director Interviews</ENT>
                        <ENT>4</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>1.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>4.00</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="n,s">
                        <ENT I="01">Health System Advisor Surveys</ENT>
                        <ENT>63</ENT>
                        <ENT>1</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.17</ENT>
                        <ENT>10.71</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Estimated Annual Total</ENT>
                        <ENT>147</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT>94.71</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>Table 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden based on the time required for respondents to participate in this project. This cost was calculated using average hourly earnings for May 2018, obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' estimates for occupational employment wages. The total estimated cost burden for this data collection is $19,580.75 (or approximately $6,526.92 each year). The following hourly wages were used in the annualized cost calculations: $37.38 per hour for a scholar, $96.22 per hour for a health system advisor, and $52.81 per hour for a program director.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s50,12,14,12,12">
                    <TTITLE>Table 2—Estimated Annualized Cost Burden</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Instrument</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Estimated number of 
                            <LI>respondents</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Total annual 
                            <LI>burden estimate </LI>
                            <LI>(hours)</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Hourly rate</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Total cost</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Scholar Interviews *</ENT>
                        <ENT>41</ENT>
                        <ENT>41.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>$37.38</ENT>
                        <ENT>$1,532.58</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Health System Advisor Interviews **</ENT>
                        <ENT>39</ENT>
                        <ENT>39.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>$96.22</ENT>
                        <ENT>3,752.58</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Program Director Interviews ***</ENT>
                        <ENT>4</ENT>
                        <ENT>4.00</ENT>
                        <ENT>$52.81</ENT>
                        <ENT>211.24</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW RUL="n,s">
                        <ENT I="01">Health System Advisor Surveys **</ENT>
                        <ENT>63</ENT>
                        <ENT>10.71</ENT>
                        <ENT>$96.22</ENT>
                        <ENT>1,030.52</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="03">Estimated Annual Total</ENT>
                        <ENT>147</ENT>
                        <ENT>94.71</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                        <ENT>6,526.92</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <TNOTE>
                        Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), U.S. Department of Labor. (2018). 
                        <E T="03">Occupational employment statistics May 2018 national wages. https://www.bls.gov/oes/home.htm</E>
                    </TNOTE>
                    <TNOTE>* The hourly wage for scholars varies depending on the scholar's degree. AHRQ averaged hourly wages using the following occupations code to develop an estimate that represents the mix of medical and academic degrees: 29-0000, 29-1000, 21-0000.</TNOTE>
                    <TNOTE>** AHRQ anticipates that many health system advisors will be C-suite leaders. The hourly wage for BLS's occupation code 11-1010 (chief executive) was used for this estimate.</TNOTE>
                    <TNOTE>*** Program directors hold various roles and responsibilities and, therefore, have varied salaries. For the purpose of this estimate, the hourly wages for the following managerial and post-secondary occupational codes were averaged: 11-3131,11-1021,11-9030,11-9033,11-9039, and 11-9199.</TNOTE>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Request for Comments</HD>
                <P>In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested with regard to any of the following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ's health care research and health care information dissemination functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information upon the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.</P>
                <P>Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Virginia L. Mackay-Smith,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Associate Director.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12513 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4160-90-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35429"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Administration for Children and Families</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[CFDA Number: 93.604]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Announcement of Intent To Award 35 Operating Division (OPDIV)-Initiated Supplements for Grantees Under the Direct Services for Survivors of Torture Program</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of intent to issue 35 OPDIV-Initiated Supplements.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>ACF, ORR, Division of Refugee Health announces the intent to award 35 OPDIV-Initiated Supplements in amounts ranging from $23,500 to $95,569 to grantees providing direct services funded through the Services for Survivors of Torture Program. See Table 1 below for more details on the supplement awards.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The proposed period of support for the supplements begins on September 30, 2020, and ends on September 29, 2021.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Curi Kim, Division Director, Division of Refugee Health, Office of Refugee Resettlement, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC, 20201. Telephone: 202-401-5585. Email: 
                        <E T="03">curi.kim@acf.hhs.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>The supplements will be allocated to (1) make grantee award amounts whole (equal to their original requested amount); (2) provide a $23,500 increase to all grantees; and (3) provide an increase to two grantees in areas of highest need with the largest waiting lists: Texas and New York. The table below shows the grantees' organization name, location, and supplemental award amount.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="4" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s100,r35,r15,12">
                    <TTITLE>Table 1</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Organization name</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">City</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">State</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Supplement amount</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services</ENT>
                        <ENT>Dearborn</ENT>
                        <ENT>MI</ENT>
                        <ENT>$36,869</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Asian Americans for Community Involvement, Center for Survivors of Torture</ENT>
                        <ENT>San Jose</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Bethany Christian Services, Center for Healing Torture Trauma</ENT>
                        <ENT>Grand Rapids</ENT>
                        <ENT>MI</ENT>
                        <ENT>31,409</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Bilingual International Assistance Services</ENT>
                        <ENT>St. Louis</ENT>
                        <ENT>MO</ENT>
                        <ENT>47,912</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Boston Medical Center, Boston Center for Refugee Health and Human Rights</ENT>
                        <ENT>Boston</ENT>
                        <ENT>MA</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,231</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Catholic Charities Corporation</ENT>
                        <ENT>Cleveland</ENT>
                        <ENT>OH</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,166</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Center for Survivors of Torture</ENT>
                        <ENT>Dallas</ENT>
                        <ENT>TX</ENT>
                        <ENT>90,989</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Connecticut Institute for Refugees and Immigrants</ENT>
                        <ENT>Bridgeport</ENT>
                        <ENT>CT</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Gulf Coast Jewish Family and Community Services, Florida Center for Survivors of Torture</ENT>
                        <ENT>Clearwater</ENT>
                        <ENT>FL</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Heartland Alliance International, Marjorie Kovler Center</ENT>
                        <ENT>Chicago</ENT>
                        <ENT>IL</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,231</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">HIAS, Capital Area Healing Coalition</ENT>
                        <ENT>Silver Spring</ENT>
                        <ENT>MD</ENT>
                        <ENT>84,083</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">International Rescue Committee in Colorado</ENT>
                        <ENT>New York</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">International Rescue Committee in Arizona</ENT>
                        <ENT>New York</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,231</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Lutheran Community Services Northwest, Northwest Health and Human Rights</ENT>
                        <ENT>Seatac</ENT>
                        <ENT>WA</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,015</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Lutheran Social Services Rocky Mountains, Southwest Program for Survivors of Torture in New Mexico</ENT>
                        <ENT>Denver</ENT>
                        <ENT>CO</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Nationalities Service Center, Philadelphia Partnership for Resilience Collaborative</ENT>
                        <ENT>Philadelphia</ENT>
                        <ENT>PA</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,229</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">New York City Health &amp; Hospitals, Bellevue Hospital, Program for Survivors of Torture</ENT>
                        <ENT>New York</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>79,110</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">New York City Health &amp; Hospitals, Bellevue Hospital, Torture Treatment Coalition</ENT>
                        <ENT>New York</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">New York City Health &amp; Hospitals, Elmhurst Hospital, Libertas Center for Human Rights</ENT>
                        <ENT>New York</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Northern Virginia Family Service, Program for Survivors of Torture and Trauma</ENT>
                        <ENT>Oakton</ENT>
                        <ENT>VA</ENT>
                        <ENT>28,652</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Oregon Health &amp; Science University, Torture Treatment Center of Oregon</ENT>
                        <ENT>Portland</ENT>
                        <ENT>OR</ENT>
                        <ENT>78,267</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Program for Torture Victims</ENT>
                        <ENT>Los Angeles</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Program for Torture Victims in Orange County</ENT>
                        <ENT>Los Angeles</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Survivors of Torture, International</ENT>
                        <ENT>San Diego</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">The Center for Victims of Torture in Georgia</ENT>
                        <ENT>St. Paul</ENT>
                        <ENT>MN</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">The Center for Victims of Torture</ENT>
                        <ENT>St. Paul</ENT>
                        <ENT>MN</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,231</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">The University of California, San Francisco Trauma Recovery Center, Survivors International</ENT>
                        <ENT>San Francisco</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>23,500</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Torture Abolition and Survivors Support Coalition International</ENT>
                        <ENT>Washington</ENT>
                        <ENT>DC</ENT>
                        <ENT>52,887</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Utah Health and Human Rights Project</ENT>
                        <ENT>Salt Lake City</ENT>
                        <ENT>UT</ENT>
                        <ENT>79,809</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Vermont Psychological Services, New England Survivors of Torture and Trauma</ENT>
                        <ENT>Burlington</ENT>
                        <ENT>VT</ENT>
                        <ENT>53,239</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Jewish Family Services of Western NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>Buffalo</ENT>
                        <ENT>NY</ENT>
                        <ENT>74,401</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center</ENT>
                        <ENT>Boise</ENT>
                        <ENT>ID</ENT>
                        <ENT>62,879</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Partnership for Trauma Recovery</ENT>
                        <ENT>Berkeley</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>71,878</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">University of Louisville Research Foundation</ENT>
                        <ENT>Louisville</ENT>
                        <ENT>KY</ENT>
                        <ENT>95,557</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles</ENT>
                        <ENT>Los Angeles</ENT>
                        <ENT>CA</ENT>
                        <ENT>95,569</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <PRTPAGE P="35430"/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Statutory Authority:</E>
                     Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998, section 5(a), Public Law 105-320, 22 U.S.C. 2152 note.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Elizabeth Leo,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Senior Grants Policy Specialist, Division of Grants Policy, Office of Administration.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12564 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4184-45-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>U.S. Customs and Border Protection</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. USCBP-2020-0018]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Request for Applicants for Appointment to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection User Fee Advisory Committee</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Committee Management; Request for Applicants for Appointment to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection User Fee Advisory Committee.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is requesting individuals who are interested in serving on the CBP User Fee Advisory Committee (UFAC or Committee) to apply for appointment. UFAC is tasked with providing advice to the Secretary of Homeland Security through the Commissioner of CBP on matters related to the performance of inspections coinciding with the assessment of a customs or immigration user fee.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Applications for membership should be submitted to CBP at the address below on or before July 27, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>If you wish to apply for membership, your application should be submitted by one of the following means:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Email: TRADEEVENTS@cbp.dhs.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Fax:</E>
                         (202) 325-4290.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Ms. Sonja Grant, Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 3.5A, Washington, DC 20229.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Ms. Sonja Grant, Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 3.5A, Washington, DC 20229; telephone (202) 344-1440; facsimile (202) 325-4290.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>UFAC is an advisory committee established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix (“FACA”), and operates according to the provisions of FACA except as specified in 8 U.S.C. 1356(k) and 19 U.S.C. 58c(k).</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Balanced Membership Plans:</E>
                     The Committee may consist of up to 20 members. Members are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Secretary of Homeland Security. Members are selected to represent the points of view of the airline, cruise line, maritime, trucking, rail, transportation, and other industries that may be subject to customs or immigration user fees. Members may not be Special Government Employees as defined in 18 U.S.C. 202(a). To achieve a fairly balanced membership, the composition of an advisory committee's membership will depend upon several factors, including the advisory committee's mission; the geographic, ethnic, social, economic, or scientific impact of the advisory committee's recommendations; the types of specific perspectives required (such as those of consumers, technical experts, the public at-large, academia, business, etc.); the need to obtain divergent points of view on the issues before the advisory committee; and, the relevance of state, local, or tribal governments to the development of the advisory committee's recommendations. The Commissioner of CBP will consider a cross-section of those directly affected, interested, and qualified, as appropriate to the nature and functions of the Committee. Individuals with expertise in transportation legislative/regulatory/government affairs, transportation finance (ticket sale operations, fee collection and remittance, passenger and cargo revenue accounting, corporate treasury management and cash and traffic forecasting, and international carrier bonds), and global distribution systems are encouraged to apply. Members will not be paid or reimbursed for any travel, lodging expenses, or related costs for their participation on the Committee.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Committee Meetings:</E>
                </P>
                <P>The Committee is expected to have an in-person public meeting at least once per charter year. The meetings may be held in Washington, DC or at other locations with CBP operations with the approval of the Designated Federal Officer. UFAC meetings will be open to the public unless a determination is made by the appropriate Department of Homeland Security official in accordance with Department of Homeland Security policy and directives that the meeting should be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c).</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Committee Membership:</E>
                </P>
                <P>Members will serve a three-year term of office that runs from the date that their appointment letters are signed. Members will not be paid compensation by the Federal Government for their services with respect to the Committee. Members will not be paid or reimbursed for any travel, lodging expenses, or related costs for their participation on the Committee.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Application for Advisory Committee Appointment</HD>
                <P>Any interested person wishing to serve on UFAC must provide the following:</P>
                <P>• Statement of interest and reasons for application;</P>
                <P>• Complete professional resume;</P>
                <P>• Home address and telephone number;</P>
                <P>• Work address, telephone number, and email address; and</P>
                <P>• Statement of the industry you represent.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Mark A. Morgan,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12509 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 9111-14-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030351; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Art Theft Program, Washington, DC</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meets the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the FBI. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural item to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35431"/>
                        claim this cultural item should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the FBI at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI Headquarters, Attn: Supervisory Special Agent Timothy Carpenter, Art Theft Program, 935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20535, telephone (954) 931-3670, email 
                        <E T="03">artifacts@ic.fbi.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Cultural Items</HD>
                <P>
                    “From time immemorial, the 
                    <E T="03">Nihookaa' Dine'e Bila' Ashdla'ii</E>
                     has been tied to the aboriginal landscape” through their oral ceremonial histories (Navajo Nation Heritage and Historic Preservation Department, 2019). Today, the Navajo Nation covers some 27,000 square miles extending from Utah into Arizona and New Mexico. At an unknown date, 11 sacred objects were acquired in the Southwest and transported to the East Coast, where they remained part of a private collection of Native American antiquities, art and cultural heritage. In the spring of 2018, these items were seized by the FBI as part of a criminal investigation. Regional archeologists from museums and universities helped identify the American Southwest origin of the items. Subsequent face-to-face consultation conducted in Albuquerque, New Mexico on April 13, 2019, with the Navajo Nation's Tribal Historic Preservation Officer/Department Manager and other representatives of the Navajo Nation's Heritage and Historic Preservation Department showed the items to be culturally affiliated with the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico &amp; Utah, and their identity as specific ceremonial objects that had been erroneously identified by the collector as masks.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 11 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico &amp; Utah.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI Headquarters, Attn: Supervisory Special Agent Timothy Carpenter, Art Theft Program, 935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20535, telephone (954) 931-3670, email 
                    <E T="03">artifacts@ic.fbi.gov,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred items to the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico &amp; Utah may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Federal Bureau of Investigation is responsible for notifying the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico &amp; Utah that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 15, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12548 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030353; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        B. Sunday Eiselt, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, 3225 Daniel Avenue, Heroy Hall #450, Dallas, TX 75205, telephone (214) 768-2915, email 
                        <E T="03">seiselt@smu.edu.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX. The human remains were removed from site X41CU12, Culberson County, TX.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>
                    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Comanche Nation, Oklahoma; Fort Still Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; Tonkawa Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; and the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco &amp; Tawakonie) (hereafter referred to as “The Tribes”).
                    <PRTPAGE P="35432"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>At an unknown time, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site X41CU12 in Culberson County, TX. The only provenience information provided for these long bone fragments is Culberson County, TX . As Southern Methodist University (SMU) worked on the Sulfur Draw project in Culberson, these human remains are believed to be related to this project. SMU also excavated at sites X41CU1 through X41CU11, where no human remains were identified. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on the geographical location of the human remains.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and any present-day Indian Tribe.</P>
                <P>• According to final judgements of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains were removed is the aboriginal land of The Tribes.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains may be to The Tribes.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to B. Sunday Eiselt, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, 3225 Daniel Avenue, Heroy Hall #450, Dallas, TX 75205, telephone (214) 768-2915, email 
                    <E T="03">seiselt@smu.edu,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to The Tribes may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 15, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12555 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030349; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Field Museum of Natural History has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the Field Museum of Natural History. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Field Museum of Natural History at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Helen Robbins, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                        <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL. The human remains were removed from Tappan's Island, Lincoln County, ME, and Whaleback Midden, Lincoln County, ME.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Field Museum of Natural History professional staff in consultation with representatives of the following Indian Tribes belonging to the Wabanaki Confederacy: the Aroostook Band of Micmacs (previously listed as Aroostook Band of Micmac Indians); Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians; Passamaquoddy Tribe; and the Penobscot Nation (previously listed as Penobscot Tribe of Maine)(hereafter referred to as “The Consulted Tribes”).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>Sometime in the 1880s or 1890s, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from shell heaps near the Damariscotta River in Lincoln County, ME, by Fellows Knowlton. Knowlton's collection of archeological material from shell middens was sent to the Field Museum of Natural History by his son, James E Knowlton, in February of 1894. Neither set of remains was identified as human due to their fragmentary nature until 2008. Both individuals were grouped by Knowlton with faunal remains from the sites, and they were subsequently cataloged as faunal when they were accessioned. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.</P>
                <P>One individual, represented by Field Museum catalog #49781, was removed from Tatman's Island (alternate spellings include Tappan's, Datman's, Tattan's, and Tatmares). Objects from the same assemblage suggest that the human remains most likely date to the post-contact period. The human remains are culturally affiliated to the Penobscot Nation based on historical sources and oral traditional information.</P>
                <P>
                    The second individual, represented by Field Museum catalog #49961, was removed from Whaleback Midden. Objects from the same assemblage suggest that the human remains most likely date to the post-contact period. The human remains are culturally affiliated to the Penobscot Nation based on historical sources and oral traditional information.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35433"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Field Museum of Natural History</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Field Museum of Natural History have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of two individuals of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Penobscot Nation (previously listed as Penobscot Tribe of Maine).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Helen Robbins, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                    <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Penobscot Nation (previously listed as Penobscot Tribe of Maine) may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Field Museum of Natural History is responsible for notifying The Consulted Tribes that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 15, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program. </TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12552 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030338; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Field Museum of Natural History has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Field Museum of Natural History. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Field Museum of Natural History at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Helen Robbins, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                        <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from sites on the Hopi Reservation in Navajo and Coconino Counties, AZ.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <P>This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals, number of associated funerary objects, and cultural affiliation reported in two previously published notices: Notice of Inventory Completion (75 FR 45659-45660, August 3, 2010); and corrected Notice of Inventory Completion (82 FR 20610-20611, May 3, 2017). This notice replaces both the original Notice of Inventory Completion of August 3, 2010 and the corrected Notice of Inventory Completion of May 3, 2017. It was discovered during the deaccession process for repatriation that the number of associated funerary objects and minimum number of individuals had been inadvertently misreported in the published notices. Additional information received during later research and consultation resulted in a change to the determination of cultural affiliation for the site of Payupki. Transfer of control of the items in this notice has not occurred.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Field Museum of Natural History professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>In 1900 and 1901, human remains representing, at minimum, 303 individuals were removed from sites on the Hopi Reservation in Navajo and Coconino Counties, AZ, by Charles Owen. They were removed from the sites of Awatobi, First Mesa, Burned Corn House, Chukubi, Payupki, Shongopovi, Kishuba, Sikyatki, Mishongovi, Old Mishongovi, and Old Walpi as well as unknown sites. The human remains were accessioned into the Field Museum of Natural History as part of accessions 709, 769, and 780. No known individuals were identified. The 179 associated funerary objects are 32 ceramic jars, 53 bowls, 29 pots, 18 ladles, six mugs, six vessels, 10 bahos, two beads, three stone figures, six stone slabs, five faunal remains, two seeds, two pipes, one shell ornament, one ear pendant, one colander, one lot of paint, and one lithic flake.</P>
                <P>The human remains have been identified as Native American based on the burial context and the specific cultural and geographic attribution in Field Museum of Natural History records. All of the human remains were identified as “Hopi” and were removed from sites on the Hopi Indian Reservation, AZ. “Hopi” descendants from the Hopi Indian Reservation are represented by the present-day Hopi Tribe of Arizona.</P>
                <P>
                    The site of Payupki was recorded in Charles Owen's notes as being founded in 1680 by people from the “Rio Grande district” who lived there for a few generations before returning from where they had come. Based on academic literature and oral tradition, these people were the ancestors of the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico. Therefore, the one set of human remains and one associated funerary object (one lithic flake) from Payupki are affiliated to the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35434"/>
                    Hopi Tribe of Arizona as well as the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Field Museum of Natural History</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Field Museum of Natural History have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 303 individuals of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 179 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects from the sites of Awatobi, First Mesa, Burned Corn House, Chukubi, Shongopovi, Kishuba, Sikyatki, Mishongovi, Old Mishongovi, and Old Walpi and the Hopi Tribe of Arizona.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary object from the site of Payupki and the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Helen Robbins, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                    <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Field Museum of Natural History is responsible for notifying the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 13, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program. </TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12549 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030318; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Field Museum of Natural History (Field Museum), in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Field Museum. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Field Museum at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Helen Robbins, Director of Repatriation, The Field Museum, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                        <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Cultural Item(s)</HD>
                <P>In 1900 and 1901, six cultural items were removed from the site of Payupki in Navajo County, AZ. The items were removed by Charles Owen over the course of two field seasons. The excavations were sponsored by Stanley McCormick on behalf of the Field Museum of Natural History. The six unassociated funerary objects are one ceramic jar, one ceramic pot, and four ceramic bowls.</P>
                <P>Owen's field notes and the corresponding field numbers on the items show by a preponderance of evidence that the items were removed from graves. The items were all removed from the Hopi Reservation. They are culturally affiliated with the Hopi Tribe of Arizona based on academic literature, oral tradition, and consultation with the Hopi Tribe.</P>
                <P>The site of Payupki was recorded in Charles Owen's notes as being founded in 1680 by people from the “Rio Grande district” who lived at the site for a few generations before returning from where they had come. Based on academic literature and oral traditional information, these people were the ancestors of the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Field Museum of Natural History</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Field Museum of Natural History have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the six cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary objects and the Hopi Tribe of Arizona.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Helen Robbins, Director of Repatriation, The Field Museum, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, telephone (312) 665-7317, email 
                    <E T="03">hrobbins@fieldmuseum.org,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the unassociated funerary objects to the Hopi Tribe of Arizona may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The Field Museum is responsible for notifying the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35435"/>
                    the Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico that this notice has been published.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 11, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12556 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030269; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, Chapel Hill, NC</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Dr. C. Margaret Scarry, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, University of North Carolina, Campus Box 3120, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120, telephone (919) 962-6574, email 
                        <E T="03">scarry@email.unc.edu.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, Chapel Hill, NC. The human remains were removed from: Jaketown Site (22 HU 505), Humphreys County, MS; and Lake George Site (22 YZ 557), Yazoo County, MS.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Jena Band of Choctaw Indians; Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; Quapaw Nation (previously listed as The Quapaw Tribe of Indians); The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; and The Muscogee (Creek) Nation (hereafter referred to as “The Consulted Tribes”).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>In 1963, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from Jaketown site (22 HU 505) in Humphreys County, MS, by University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology archeologists Brian Egloff and Jeff Reid. The human remains (17 bone fragments collected from the site's surface) were transported to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology for cleaning and storage. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. These human remains most likely date to the Mississippian period (A.D. 1100-1600).</P>
                <P>In 1963, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Lake George site (22 YZ 557) in Yazoo County, MS, by University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology archeologists Brian Egloff and Jeff Reid. The human remains (18 bone fragments collected from the site's surface) were transported to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology for cleaning and storage. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present. These human remains most likely date to the Mississippian period (A.D. 1100-1600).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology</HD>
                <P>Officials of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on their physical association with Native American cultural materials and occurrence at Native American archeological sites.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of three individuals of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and any present-day Indian Tribe.</P>
                <P>• According to final judgments of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains were removed is the aboriginal land of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.</P>
                <P>• Treaties, Acts of Congress, or Executive Orders indicate that the land from which the Native American human remains were removed is the aboriginal land of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains may be to the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. C. Margaret Scarry, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, University of North Carolina, Campus Box 3120, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120, telephone (919) 962-6574, email 
                    <E T="03">scarry@email.unc.edu,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35436"/>
                    Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Archaeology is responsible for notifying The Consulted Tribes that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12550 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030352; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: History Colorado, Formerly Colorado Historical Society, Denver, CO</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>History Colorado has completed an inventory of human remains in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to History Colorado. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to History Colorado at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Isabel Tovar, History Colorado, 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203, telephone (303) 866-4531, email 
                        <E T="03">isabel.tovar@state.co.us.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of History Colorado, Denver, CO. The human remains were removed from Lincoln County, CO.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by History Colorado professional staff in consultation with representatives of the following Indian Tribes: The Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); Comanche Nation, Oklahoma; Eastern Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana; Oglala Sioux Tribe (previously listed as Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota); Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; Pueblo of Santa Clara, New Mexico; Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota; Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado; Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North &amp; South Dakota; Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota; Ute Mountain Ute Tribe (previously listed as Ute Mountain Tribe of the Ute Mountain Reservation, Colorado, New Mexico &amp; Utah); and the Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico. The Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow Creek Reservation, South Dakota; Crow Tribe of Montana; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Ohkay Owingeh, New Mexico (previously listed as Pueblo of San Juan); and the Pueblo of San Felipe, New Mexico were invited to consult but did not participate. Hereafter, all the Tribes listed above are referred to as “The Consulted and Invited Tribes.”</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>Around 1935, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a site one and a half miles west of Karval, Lincoln County, CO. In August 2018, a private citizen rediscovered the human remains—a cranium—while helping a family friend whose father had removed the cranium. The Lincoln County Coroner ruled out a forensic interest and released jurisdiction over the human remains to the Office of the State Archaeologist. Osteological analysis of the human remains (OAHP 337) conducted at the Metropolitan State University of Denver Human Identification Laboratory determined that the human remains belong to a Native American adult female. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by History Colorado</HD>
                <P>Officials of History Colorado have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on osteological analysis and burial context.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and any present-day Indian Tribe.</P>
                <P>• According to final judgments of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains were removed is the aboriginal land of the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana (hereafter referred to as “The Tribes”).</P>
                <P>• Treaties, Acts of Congress, or Executive Orders indicate that the land from which the Native American human remains were removed is the aboriginal land of The Tribes.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains may be to The Tribes.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Isabel Tovar, History Colorado, 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203, telephone (303) 866-4531, email 
                    <E T="03">isabel.tovar@state.co.us,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to The Tribes may proceed.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35437"/>
                </P>
                <P>History Colorado is responsible for notifying The Consulted and Invited Tribes that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 15, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program. </TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12554 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030316; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA, and Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>Central Washington University and the Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum (Burke Museum) have completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations and have determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to Central Washington University or the Burke Museum. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Central Washington University or the Burke Museum at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Lourdes Henebry-DeLeon, Department of Anthropology, Central Washington University, 400 East University Way, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7544, telephone (509) 963-2671, email 
                        <E T="03">Lourdes.Henebry-DeLeon@cwu.edu</E>
                         and Peter Lape, Burke Museum, University of Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA 98195, telephone (206) 685-3849 Ext. 2, email 
                        <E T="03">plape@uw.edu.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA, and the Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from near the Sultan River near the city of Sultan, Snohomish County, WA.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by Central Washington University and Burke Museum professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe (previously listed as Snoqualmie Tribe, Washington) and the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from near the Sultan River, a branch of the Skykomish River, near the city of Sultan in Snohomish County, WA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed by Mr. Dennis Osier and Mr. Robert Franz and donated to the Burke Museum in 1966 (Burke Accn. #1966-75). In 1974, the Burke Museum legally transferred the human remains to Central Washington University (CWU Accn. BN). No known individuals were identified. The 15 funerary objects are one leather shoe, one shell button, one lot of wool fragments, and 12 rusted nails. The funerary objects are still in the possession of the Burke Museum.</P>
                <P>The human remains have been determined to be Native American based on osteological and archeological evidence. The presence of copper staining on the human remains is consistent with historic Native American burial practices in this area. The city of Sultan is situated at the confluence of the Skykomish and Sultan Rivers and was previously the site of a large permanent Skykomish village. Information provided during consultations, as well as historical and anthropological sources, indicate that the area around Sultan is within the traditional territory of the Skykomish and Snohomish (Haeberlin and Gunther, 1930; Hollenbeck, 1987). Ruby and Brown (1986), Suttles (1990) and Spier (1936) associate the area around the Sultan River with the Skykomish. Mooney (1896) associates the area around the Sultan River with the Snohomish. The Skykomish and Snohomish people relocated to the Tulalip Reservation per the Point Elliot Treaty of 1855. The present-day Tulalip Tribes of Washington are the successors in interest to the Skykomish and Snohomish.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by Central Washington University and the Burke Museum</HD>
                <P>Officials of Central Washington University and the Burke Museum have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of two individuals of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 15 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Lourdes Henebry-DeLeon, Department of Anthropology, Central Washington University, 400 East University Way, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7544, telephone (509) 963-2671, email 
                    <E T="03">Lourdes.Henebry-DeLeon@cwu.edu,</E>
                     and Peter Lape, Burke Museum, University of Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35438"/>
                    98195, telephone (206) 685-3849 Ext. 2, email 
                    <E T="03">plape@uw.edu,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington) may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>Central Washington University and the Burke Museum are responsible for notifying the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe (previously listed as Snoqualmie Tribe, Washington) and the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington) that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 11, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program. </TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12551 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030240; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: John Michael Kohler Arts Center, Sheboygan, WI</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The John Michael Kohler Arts Center, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the John Michael Kohler Arts Center. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the John Michael Kohler Arts Center at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Sam Gappmayer, Director, John Michael Kohler Arts Center, 608 New York Avenue, Sheboygan, WI 53081, telephone (920) 458-6114, email 
                        <E T="03">sgappmayer@jmkac.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the John Michael Kohler Arts Center, Sheboygan, WI, that meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony under 25 U.S.C. 3001.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Cultural Item(s)</HD>
                <P>In the early 1900's, 5,816 cultural items were removed from in and around the city of Sheboygan in Sheboygan County, WI. The items were removed by Sheboygan Jeweler Rudolph Kuehne. After his death, they were sold to the Kohler Foundation in the late 1920's by Kuehne's widow. The collection was packed away and not studied until 1968 when it was examined by John Michael Kohler Arts Center in connection with an exhibition. Kohler Foundation gifted the collection to the John Michael Arts Center on August 15, 1974.</P>
                <P>The 5,816 cultural items include 2,717 stone points and stone point fragments, 1,165 scrapers/scraper fragments, seven stone hand axes, 130 stone celts/hammerstones, 97 grooved stone hammers/axe heads, 17 stone gorgets, eight stone beads, 59 gaming stones, one stone implement club, one stone pestle, 93 stone sinkers/weights, two stone bar amulets, 213 copper points, 16 copper blades, 531 copper awls/needles, 147 copper hooks, 307 copper preforms/floats/modified copper, 24 copper beads, three copper wedges/chisels, one copper pike, three copper rings/adornments, one copper spud, one copper bannerstone, three copper crescents, five stone pipe components, five clay pipe components, two wood pipe components, two pipe tomahawks, 44 worked antler/bone fragments, 31 Antlers/bone awls/points, eight small clay vessels (&lt;6″ dia.), 15 medium clay vessels (6″-12″ dia.), one large clay vessel (&gt;12″ dia.), 49 boxes of pottery fragments (each box approx. 3″ x 12″ x 9″), 86 clay pottery fragments, one clay animal effigy, six boxes of geology/plant specimens (each box approx. 3″ x 12″ x 9″), seven beaded belts/saches, one beaded pouch/bag, one beaded footwear (pair), two beaded bands, and three beaded necklaces.</P>
                <P>Consultation with Eben Crawford, Curator and NAGPRA Assistant for the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, supports determination that the objects listed in this notice are cultural items. According to Mr. Crawford “The aforementioned objects currently in the possession of the John Michael Kohler Arts Center are either identified by accession information as belonging to the Tribe or were collected in the area the Tribe and its ancestors historically inhabited.”</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the John Michael Kohler Arts Center</HD>
                <P>Officials of the John Michael Kohler Arts Center have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(D), the 5,816 cultural items described above have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group or culture itself, rather than property owned by an individual.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the objects of cultural patrimony and the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Sam Gappmayer, Director, John Michael Kohler Arts Center, 608 New York Avenue, Sheboygan, WI 53081, telephone (920) 458-6114, email 
                    <E T="03">sgappmayer@jmkac.org,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the objects of cultural patrimony to the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The John Michael Kohler Arts Center is responsible for notifying the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: April 23, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12546 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35439"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030254; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Minnesota Museum of American Art, St. Paul, MN</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Minnesota Museum of American Art, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the one cultural item listed in this notice meets the definition of a sacred object and an object of cultural patrimony. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim this cultural item should submit a written request to the Minnesota Museum of American Art. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural item to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim this cultural item should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Minnesota Museum of American Art at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Kristin Makholm, Executive Director, Minnesota Museum of American Art, 350 Robert Street N, St. Paul, MN 55101, telephone (651) 492-0309, email 
                        <E T="03">kmakholm@mmaa.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate a cultural item under the control of the Minnesota Museum of American Art, St. Paul, MN, that meets the definition of a sacred object and an object of cultural patrimony under 25 U.S.C. 3001.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Cultural Item</HD>
                <P>Sometime between 1926 and 1936, while he was superintendent of schools in Wrangell, AK, Axel Rasmussen collected a killer whale shirt. After his death in 1945, his collection of Northwest Coast objects was dispersed. The collection was reassembled by Earl Stendahl, and part of it, including the killer whale shirt, was sold to the Portland Art Museum in Portland, OR. In 1957, the Minnesota Museum of American Art, formerly the Saint Paul Gallery, purchased the killer whale shirt from the Portland Art Museum. The killer whale shirt is both a sacred object and an object of cultural patrimony.</P>
                <P>
                    Documentation provided by the Central Council of the Tlingit &amp; Haida Indian Tribes, acting on behalf of itself and the Wrangell Cooperative Association—specifically the Tlingit clan 
                    <E T="03">Naanya.aayí</E>
                    —confirms the Tlingit identity of this cultural item and the clan's rightful custodianship of it. The Central Council described how the clan came to own the name and crest killer whale 
                    <E T="03">Sheiyksh,</E>
                     and demonstrated the traditional uncle-to-nephew hereditary transfer of the item going back to the first Chief Shakes. The shirt itself has Tahltan style beadwork on the collar, signifying that it is from the Stikine and Wrangell area. The Central Council also provided video evidence of Chief Shakes VII wearing the killer whale shirt in a potlach on June 3-4, 1940. The shirt has ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance for the Tlingit people, and under the Tlingit system of communal property ownership, it could not be alienated, appropriated, or conveyed by any individual. The killer whale shirt bonds the Tlingit people to their ancestors, symbolizing the people's relationship to the being depicted on it. Incorporating the crest design, it provides a physical form in which spiritual beings manifest their presence. In addition, the shirt is needed for current and ongoing cultural and religious practices.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Minnesota Museum of American Art</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Minnesota Museum of American Art have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the one cultural item described above is a specific ceremonial object needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(D), the one cultural item described above has ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group or culture itself, rather than property owned by an individual.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred object and object of cultural patrimony and the Central Council of the Tlingit &amp; Haida Indian Tribes and the Wrangell Cooperative Association.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Kristin Makholm, Executive Director, Minnesota Museum of American Art, 350 Robert Street N, St. Paul, MN 55101, telephone (651) 492-0309, email 
                    <E T="03">kmakholm@mmaa.org,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred object and object of cultural patrimony to the Central Council of the Tlingit &amp; Haida Indian Tribes and the Wrangell Cooperative Association may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Minnesota Museum of American Art is responsible for notifying Central Council of the Tlingit &amp; Haida Indian Tribes and the Wrangell Cooperative Association that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: April 28, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12547 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>National Park Service</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0030350; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Inventory Completion: The Florida Department of State/Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee, FL</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Park Service, Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35440"/>
                        organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources at the address in this notice by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Kathryn Miyar, Florida Department of State, Mission San Luis Collections, 2100 West Tennessee Street, Tallahassee, FL 32304, telephone (850) 245-6301, email 
                        <E T="03">kathryn.miyar@dos.myflorida.com.</E>
                    </P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee, FL. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from the Manasota Key Offshore site, Sarasota County, FL.</P>
                <P>This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Consultation</HD>
                <P>A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians; Seminole Tribe of Florida (previously listed as the Seminole Tribe of Florida (Dania, Big Cypress, Brighton, Hollywood &amp; Tampa Reservations); and The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma (hereafter referred to as “The Tribes”).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">History and Description of the Remains</HD>
                <P>From 2016 to 2018, human remains representing, at minimum, 11 individuals were removed from the Manasota Key Offshore site in Sarasota County, FL. In June 2016, the Florida Division of Historical Resources (DHR) Bureau of Archaeological Research (BAR) staff were notified of prehistoric human remains that had washed ashore on Manasota Key in Sarasota County. Underwater archeological staff investigated the incident and discovered the human remains were from an Archaic burial site (7,000 B.P.) now inundated offshore under the Gulf of Mexico. This site is legally protected under Chapter 267 and Section 872.05, Florida Statutes, requiring state archeologists to preserve and protect the site from both human and natural impacts. Underwater archeological excavations were conducted by BAR from 2017 to 2018, in order to develop a protection plan for the underwater cemetery. These excavations resulted in the recovery of in situ remains representing 11 individuals, including seven adults, two infants, and two prenates. No known individuals were identified. The 49 associated funerary objects include 10 fiber cordage fragments, one modified conch shell, two modified oyster drills, one shell pendant, and 35 wooden stake fragments.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Determinations Made by the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources</HD>
                <P>Officials of the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources have determined that:</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on contextual information and osteological analysis.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 11 individuals of Native American ancestry.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 49 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribe.</P>
                <P>• According to final judgments of the Indian Claims Commission in 1978, the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the aboriginal land of The Tribes.</P>
                <P>• The Treaty with the Florida Tribes of Indians in 1823 (Cession 118) and the Treaty with the Seminoles in 1832 (Cession 173) indicate that the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the aboriginal land of The Tribes.</P>
                <P>• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to The Tribes.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Additional Requestors and Disposition</HD>
                <P>
                    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Kathryn Miyar, Florida Department of State, Mission San Luis Collections, 2100 West Tennessee Street, Tallahassee, FL 32304, telephone (850) 245-6301, email 
                    <E T="03">kathryn.miyar@dos.myflorida.com,</E>
                     by July 10, 2020. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to The Tribes may proceed.
                </P>
                <P>The Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: May 15, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Melanie O'Brien,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Manager, National NAGPRA Program. </TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12553 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4312-52-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Bureau of Ocean Energy Management</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket ID: BOEM-2020-0019]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Extension of Post-Sale Evaluation Period for Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale 254</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Interior.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice to extend post-sale evaluation period.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        This Notice extends the post-sale evaluation period for the Gulf of Mexico, Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Lease Sale 254 (Sale 254) by an additional 30 days. BOEM will complete the post-sale evaluation 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35441"/>
                        process for all bids received at Sale 254 by July 16, 2020. This extension is necessary due to operational constraints for the employees located in the BOEM New Orleans office resulting from health and safety concerns associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to current hardware and software infrastructure limitations, BOEM staff are unable to perform geophysical subsurface interpretation while teleworking from their homes. Additional in-office work is still necessary to complete the post-sale evaluation process for these bids. Louisiana has been hit especially hard by the COVID-19 virus. The two most affected Louisiana parishes are Orleans and Jefferson Parishes, where the BOEM office building is located and most of the employees reside. In consideration of these factors, precautions and preventive measures were taken to keep all employees working from the safety of their homes until conditions improve.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The post-sale evaluation period for Sale 254 will conclude on July 16, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Matthew Wilson, Regional Supervisor, Office of Resource Evaluation, Gulf of Mexico Region, telephone 504-736-2710.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>In connection with the Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale 254, held on March 18, 2020, BOEM received 84 bids on 71 tracts. On April 29, 2020, BOEM started the post bid-adequacy determination process in a limited capacity.</P>
                <P>The COVID-19 pandemic introduced many operational challenges to BOEM management and staff of the New Orleans office. In compliance with both Federal and State guidelines and to limit the spread and impact of the COVID-19 virus on BOEM employees and the local community, the post-sale evaluation work was delayed. Even though it was deemed safe for mission essential employees to return to the office building on April 29, 2020, required social distancing measures will preclude full staffing and limit the Bureau's ability to timely complete routine work processes.</P>
                <P>
                    As a result of the delays in staff being able to return to the office and the required changes in the work environment (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     social distancing measures), BOEM requires additional time to conduct and complete the bid review process, originally scheduled to conclude on June 16, 2020, 90 days following the March 18, 2020 sale date. Under the provision of 30 CFR 556.516(b), BOEM is extending the bid evaluation period for Sale 254 until July 16, 2020.
                </P>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority: </HD>
                    <P>This Notice is published pursuant to 30 CFR 556.516(b).</P>
                </AUTH>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Michael Celata,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Regional Director, New Orleans Office, Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12527 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>U.S. International Trade Commission.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled 
                        <E T="03">Certain Completion Drill Bits and Products Containing the Same, DN 3458;</E>
                         the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing pursuant to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at 
                        <E T="03">https://edis.usitc.gov.</E>
                         For help accessing EDIS, please email 
                        <E T="03">EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.usitc.gov</E>
                         . The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at 
                        <E T="03">https://edis.usitc.gov.</E>
                         Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Varel International Industries, LLC on June 4, 2020. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain completion drill bits and products containing the same. The complaint names as respondents: Kingdream Public Ltd. Co. of China; and Taurex Drill Bits, LLC of Norman, OK. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).</P>
                <P>Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.</P>
                <P>In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:</P>
                <P>(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;</P>
                <P>(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;</P>
                <P>(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;</P>
                <P>(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and</P>
                <P>(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.</P>
                <P>
                    Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35442"/>
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to § 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3458”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                    ) Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: 
                        <E T="03">https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. 
                    <E T="03">See</E>
                     19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): 
                        <E T="03">https://edis.usitc.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).</P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>By order of the Commission.</P>
                    <DATED>Issued: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Lisa Barton,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary to the Commission.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12557 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 7020-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-647 and 731-TA-1517-1520 (Preliminary)]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam; Revised Schedule for the Subject Investigations</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>United States International Trade Commission.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>June 4, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Keysha Martinez (202-205-2136), 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 (
                        <E T="03">https://www.usitc.gov</E>
                        ). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at 
                        <E T="03">https://edis.usitc.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>On May 13, 2020, the Commission established a schedule for the conduct of the preliminary phase of the subject investigations (85 FR 29972, May 19, 2020). Subsequently, the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) extended the deadline for its initiation determinations from June 2, 2020 to June 22, 2020 (85 FR 32013, May 28, 2020). The Commission, therefore, is revising its schedule to conform with Commerce's new schedule.</P>
                <P>The Commission must reach preliminary determinations by July 17, 2020, and the Commission's views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by July 24, 2020.</P>
                <P>For further information concerning this proceeding, see the Commission's notice cited above and the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207).</P>
                <AUTH>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                    <P>These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.21 of the Commission's rules.</P>
                </AUTH>
                <SIG>
                    <P>By order of the Commission.</P>
                    <DATED>Issued: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Lisa Barton,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary to the Commission.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12512 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 7020-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION </AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Notice: 20-052]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>NASA Astrophysics Advisory Committee; Meeting </SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Aeronautics and Space Administration. </P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of meeting. </P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces a meeting of the Astrophysics Advisory Committee. This Committee reports to the Director, Astrophysics Division, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters. The meeting will be held for the purpose of soliciting from the scientific community and other persons, scientific and technical information relevant to program planning. </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Tuesday, June 23, 2020, 12:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.; and Wednesday, June 24, 2020, 11:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., Eastern Time.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Virtual meeting via dial-in teleconference and WebEx only.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Ms. KarShelia Henderson, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-2355, fax (202) 358-2779, or 
                        <E T="03">khenderson@nasa.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    As noted above, this meeting will be available telephonically and by WebEx only. You must use a touch-tone phone to participate in this meeting. Any interested person may dial the USA toll free conference call number 1-877-922-4779 or toll number 1-312-470-7379, passcode 5276208, to participate in this meeting by telephone on both days. The WebEx link is 
                    <E T="03">https://nasaenterprise.webex.com/;</E>
                     the meeting number on June 23, is 905 738 400, password is Apac0620#; and the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35443"/>
                    meeting number on June 24 is 904 887 045, password is Apac0620#.
                </P>
                <P>The agenda for the meeting includes the following topics:</P>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">—Astrophysics Division Update</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">—Updates on Specific Astrophysics Missions</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">—Reports from the Program Analysis Groups</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-1">—Reports from Specific Research &amp; Analysis Programs</FP>
                <P>
                    The agenda will be posted on the Astrophysics Advisory Committee web page: 
                    <E T="03">https://science.nasa.gov/researchers/nac/science-advisory-committees/apac.</E>
                </P>
                <P>It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Patricia Rausch, </NAME>
                    <TITLE>Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12534 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 7510-13-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Designation of Low Income Status</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice and request for comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), as part of a continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following extension of a currently approved collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments should be received on or before August 10, 2020 to be assured consideration.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the information collection to Mackie Malaka, National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Suite 6018, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; Fax No. 703-519-8579; or email at 
                        <E T="03">PRAComments@NCUA.gov.</E>
                         Given the limited in-house staff because of the COVID-19 pandemic, email comments are preferred.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Address requests for additional information to Mackie Malaka at the address above or telephone 703-548-2704.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Number:</E>
                     3133-0117.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Designation of Low Income Status, 12 CFR part 701.34(a).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Extension of a currently approved collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The Federal Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C. 1752(5)) authorizes the NCUA Board to define low-income members so that credit unions with a membership serving predominantly low-income members can benefit from certain statutory relief and receive assistance from the Community Development Revolving Loan Fund. To utilize this authority, a credit union must receive a low-income designation from NCUA as defined in NCUA's regulations at 12 CFR 701.34. NCUA uses the information from credit unions to determine whether they meet the criteria for the low-income designation.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Private Sector: Not-for-profit institutions.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Respondents:</E>
                     287.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Responses per Respondent:</E>
                     1.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Responses:</E>
                     287.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Burden Hours per Response:</E>
                     1.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     443.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Reason for Change:</E>
                     The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved a procedural change for credit unions, in qualifying for low-income designation status, to include military personnel in the low-income designation calculation. The revision to the information collection requirements was approved as an emergency in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.13 and is set to expire November 30, 2020. This revision gave more credit unions access to congressionally appropriated COVID-19 stimulus and loan programs
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Request for Comments:</E>
                     Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. The public is invited to submit comments concerning: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper execution of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of the information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
                </P>
                <P>By Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, the National Credit Union Administration, on June 5, 2020.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Mackie I. Malaka,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>NCUA PRA Clearance Officer.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12568 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 7535-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice and request for comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), as part of a continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following extension of a currently approved collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had granted emergency approval for revisions to the information collections requirements affected by NCUA's temporary final rule, “Regulatory Relief in Response to COVID-19,” published April 21, 2020, at 85 FR 22010, in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.13. This OMB approval is set to expire October 31, 2020.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments should be received on or before August 10, 2020 to be assured consideration.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the information collection to Mackie Malaka, National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Suite 6018, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; Fax No. 703-519-8579; or email at 
                        <E T="03">PRAComments@NCUA.gov.</E>
                         Given the limited in-house staff because of the COVID-19 pandemic, email comments are preferred.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Address requests for additional information to Mackie Malaka at the address above or telephone 703-548-2704.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P SOURCE="NPAR">
                    <E T="03">OMB Number:</E>
                     3133-0141.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Organization and Operation of Federal Credit Unions—Loan Participations, 12 CFR 701.22.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     NCUA rules and regulations, §§ 701.22 and 741.225, outline the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35444"/>
                    requirements for a loan participation program. Federally insured credit unions (FICU) are required to execute a written loan participation agreement with the lead lender. Additionally, the rule requires all FICUs to maintain a loan participation policy that establishes underwriting standards and maximum concentration limits. Credit unions may apply for waivers on certain key provisions of the rule. NCUA reviews the loan participation policies and through these reviews determine whether the credit union is engaging in a safe and sound loan participation program.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Extension of a currently approved collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Private sector: not-for-profit institutions.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Respondents:</E>
                     1,898.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Responses per Respondent:</E>
                     2.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total of Annual Responses:</E>
                     3,806.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Burden Hours per Response:</E>
                     0.79.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     3,025.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Reason for Change:</E>
                     Section 701.22 was amended to temporarily raising the maximum aggregate amount of loan participation that a FICU may purchase from a single originating lender to the greater of $5,000,000 or 200 percent of the FICU's net worth. These temporary modifications will be in place until December 31, 2020, unless extended.
                </P>
                <P>It is anticipated that there will be no increase in the number of credit unions currently participating. It is estimated that these credit unions may see a slight increase in the number of loan participation agreements. The recordkeeping requirement to retain and maintain a copy of the agreement is minimal, and would not impact the recordkeeping burden. Because of the net worth increase, NCUA estimates that the waiver request on the limits will be reduced by 50 percent, for an estimated reduction of 20 burden hours.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Number:</E>
                     3133-0127.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Purchase, Sale and Pledge of Eligible Obligations, 12 CFR 701.23.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The Federal Credit Union Act limits the amount of eligible obligations a federal credit union (FCU) is permitted to purchase, sell, pledge, discount, receive or dispose of under Section 107(13), 12 U.S.C. 107. NCUA's rules and regulations further govern this limitation by prescribing additional requirements under § 701.23. The various information collections are in place to ensure a FCU's activities related to the purchase, sale, and pledge of eligible obligations comply with applicable laws and are conducted in a safe and sound manner.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Extension of a currently approved collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Private sector: not-for-profit institutions.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Respondents:</E>
                     1,097.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Responses per Respondent:</E>
                     44.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total of Annual Responses:</E>
                     48,403.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Burden Hours per Response:</E>
                     3.79
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     12,748.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Reason for Change:</E>
                     Section 701.23 was amended to temporarily suspend limitations on the eligible obligations that a FCU may purchase and hold. These temporary modifications will be in place until December 31, 2020, unless extended.
                </P>
                <P>NCUA estimates a minimal increase in the number of respondents from the suspension of the limitations and in the number of agreements. The recordkeeping requirement to retain and maintain these records would increase based on this estimate. Due to the expanded authority, waivers would not be necessary and appeals to the waivers are null during this period. An estimated increase of 2,208 burden hours is due to this change.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Number:</E>
                     3133-0040.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Federal Credit Union Occupancy, Planning, and Disposal of Acquired and Abandoned Premises, 12 CFR 701.36.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     The Federal Credit Union Act authorizes an FCU to purchase, hold, and dispose of property necessary or incidental to its operations under Section 107(4). NCUA Rules and Regulations implements this statute by including three parts to the information collection associated with the rule: Waiver of requirement for partial occupation, waiver of requirement to dispose of abandoned property and waiver of prohibited transactions. NCUA responds to the waivers by either granting or denying the request, or otherwise compromising to meet the needs of the credit union without raising safety and soundness concerns.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Extension of a currently approved collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Private sector: not-for-profit institutions.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Respondents:</E>
                     3.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated No. of Responses per Respondent:</E>
                     1.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total of Annual Responses:</E>
                     3.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Burden Hours per Response:</E>
                     10.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:</E>
                     30.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Reason for Change:</E>
                     Section 701.36 was amended by temporarily tolling the required timeframes for the occupancy or disposition of properties not being used for FCU business or that have been abandoned. These temporary modifications will be in place until December 31, 2020, unless extended.
                </P>
                <P>The temporary rule will suspend the time limit assigned to partial occupancy, disposal of abandoned property, and advertisement of the sale of abandoned property, that falls on the date of the publication of the rule through December 31, 2020; not to begin until January 1, 2021. The suspension of time requirements will eliminate the need for a waiver during this period for a reduction of 325 burden hours.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Request for Comments:</E>
                     Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. The public is invited to submit comments concerning: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper execution of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of the information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>By Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, the National Credit Union Administration, on June 5, 2020.</P>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 5, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Mackie I. Malaka,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>NCUA PRA Clearance Officer.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12569 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 7535-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Sunshine Act Meetings; Annual Board of Directors Meeting</SUBJECT>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">TIME AND DATE:</HD>
                    <P>2:00 p.m., Thursday, June 18, 2020.</P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">PLACE:</HD>
                    <P>Via Conference Call.</P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">STATUS:</HD>
                    <P>Open (with the exception of Executive Session).</P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED"> MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:</HD>
                    <P>
                        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 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35445"/>
                        (b)(2) and (4) permit closure of the following portion(s) of this meeting:
                    </P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <FP>• Executive Session</FP>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Agenda</HD>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. CALL TO ORDER</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Executive Session: Executive Compensation Review</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. Executive Session: Report from CEO</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">IV. Executive Session: Report of CFO</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">V. Action Item Approval of Minutes</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">VI. Action Item Board Elections</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">VII. Action Item Grants to Capital Corps</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">VIII. Action Item Revising the Fundraising Policy to Reflect the December 2019 Board Resolution</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">IX. Discussion Item Capital Corporations Master Investment Agreement Renewal</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">X. Discussion Item Annual Ethics Review</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">XI. Discussion Item Annual Review of Governance Operations Guide</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">XII. Management Program Background and Updates</FP>
                <FP SOURCE="FP-2">XIII. Adjournment</FP>
                <PREAMHD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Lakeyia Thompson, Special Assistant, (202) 524-9940; 
                        <E T="03">Lthompson@nw.org.</E>
                    </P>
                </PREAMHD>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Lakeyia Thompson,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Special Assistant.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12611 Filed 6-8-20; 11:15 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 7570-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBJECT>Submission of Information Collections for OMB Review; Comment Request; Liability for Termination of Single-Employer Plans</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of request for extension of OMB approval of collection of information.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) is requesting that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) extend approval, under the Paperwork Reduction Act, of a collection of information contained in its regulation on Liability for Termination of Single-Employer Plans (OMB control number 1212-0017; expires August 31, 2020). This notice informs the public of PBGC's request and solicits public comment on the collection of information.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments must be submitted by July 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to 
                        <E T="03">www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.</E>
                         Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        A copy of the request will be posted on PBGC's website at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.pbgc.gov/prac/laws-and-regulation/federal-register-notices-open-for-comment.</E>
                         It may also be obtained by writing to Disclosure Division, Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20005-4026, or calling 202-326-4040 during normal business hours. TTY users may call the Federal Relay Service toll-free at 800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4040.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Melissa Rifkin (
                        <E T="03">rifkin.melissa@pbgc.gov</E>
                        ), Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW, Washington DC 20005-4026; 202-229-6563. (TTY users may call the Federal Relay Service toll-free at 800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-229-6563.)
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>Section 4062 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, provides that the contributing sponsor of a single-employer pension plan and members of the sponsor's controlled group (“the employer”) incur liability (“employer liability”) if the plan terminates with assets insufficient to pay benefit liabilities under the plan. PBGC's statutory lien for employer liability and the payment terms for employer liability are affected by whether and to what extent employer liability exceeds 30 percent of the employer's net worth. Section 4062.6 of PBGC's employer liability regulation (29 CFR part 4062) requires a contributing sponsor or member of the contributing sponsor's controlled group that believes employer liability upon plan termination exceeds 30 percent of the employer's net worth to so notify PBGC and submit net worth information to PBGC. This information is necessary to enable PBGC to determine whether and to what extent employer liability exceeds 30 percent of the employer's net worth.</P>
                <P>
                    The collection of information under the regulation has been approved by OMB under control number 1212-0017 (expires August 31, 2020). On March 10, 2020, PBGC published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     (at 85 FR 13953) a notice informing the public of its intent to request an extension of this collection of information without modification. PBGC received a comment from one member of the public. The commenter suggested that PBGC require additional net worth information. After consideration of this comment, PBGC determined that the regulation already requires the submission of the information that the commenter suggested and that no change is needed. The comment and PBGC's rationale for its decision are discussed in the supporting statement submitted to OMB for this information collection.
                </P>
                <P>PBGC is requesting that OMB extend its approval for another three years. 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.</P>
                <P>PBGC estimates that an average of 29 contributing sponsors or controlled group members per year will respond to this collection of information. PBGC further estimates that the average annual burden of this collection of information will be 12 hours and $5,400 per respondent, with an average total annual burden of 348 hours and $156,600.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>Issued in Washington, DC, by:</P>
                    <NAME>Hilary Duke,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12510 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 7709-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket Nos. MC2020-152 and CP2020-163; MC2020-153 and CP2020-164; MC2020-154 and CP2020-165]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>New Postal Products</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Postal Regulatory Commission.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning negotiated service agreements. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Comments are due:</E>
                         June 12, 2020.
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.prc.gov.</E>
                         Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                         section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35446"/>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Table of Contents</HD>
                <EXTRACT>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Introduction</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Docketed Proceeding(s)</FP>
                </EXTRACT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the market dominant or the competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the market dominant or the competitive product list.</P>
                <P>Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.</P>
                <P>
                    The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.prc.gov</E>
                    ). Non-public portions of the Postal Service's request(s), if any, can be accessed through compliance with the requirements of 39 CFR 3011.301.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Docket No. RM2018-3, Order Adopting Final Rules Relating to Non-Public Information, June 27, 2018, Attachment A at 19-22 (Order No. 4679).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3030, and 39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and 39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Docketed Proceeding(s)</HD>
                <P>
                    1. 
                    <E T="03">Docket No(s).:</E>
                     MC2020-152 and CP2020-163; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Title:</E>
                     USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 627 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Acceptance Date:</E>
                     June 4, 2020; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Authority:</E>
                     39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 
                    <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                     and 39 CFR 3035.105; 
                    <E T="03">Public Representative:</E>
                     Christopher C. Mohr; 
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     June 12, 2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    2. 
                    <E T="03">Docket No(s).:</E>
                     MC2020-153 and CP2020-164; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Title:</E>
                     USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express &amp; Priority Mail Contract 114 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Acceptance Date:</E>
                     June 4, 2020; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Authority:</E>
                     39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 
                    <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                     and 39 CFR 3035.105; 
                    <E T="03">Public Representative:</E>
                     Christopher C. Mohr; 
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     June 12, 2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    3. 
                    <E T="03">Docket No(s).:</E>
                     MC2020-154 and CP2020-165; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Title:</E>
                     USPS Request to Add Priority Mail &amp; First-Class Package Service Contract 149 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Acceptance Date:</E>
                     June 4, 2020; 
                    <E T="03">Filing Authority:</E>
                     39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 
                    <E T="03">et seq.,</E>
                     and 39 CFR 3035.105; 
                    <E T="03">Public Representative:</E>
                     Christopher C. Mohr; 
                    <E T="03">Comments Due:</E>
                     June 12, 2020.
                </P>
                <P>
                    This Notice will be published in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Erica A. Barker,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12558 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89014; File No. SR-OCC-2020-003]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Related to Proposed Changes to The Options Clearing Corporation's Framework for Liquidity Risk Management</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 6, 2020, the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change SR-OCC-2020-003 (“Proposed Rule Change”) pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     thereunder to adopt a written framework establishing OCC's approach to managing liquidity risk.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Proposed Rule Change was published for public comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 24, 2020.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission has received no comments regarding the Proposed Rule Change.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     This order approves the Proposed Rule Change.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing 
                        <E T="03">infra</E>
                         note 4, at 85 FR 23095.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88690 (Apr. 20, 2020), 85 FR 23095 (Apr. 24, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-003) (“Notice of Filing”). OCC also filed a related advance notice (SR-OCC-2020-802) (“Advance Notice”) with the Commission pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the Exchange Act. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4, respectively. The Advance Notice was published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on May 8, 2020. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88792 (May 1, 2020), 85 FR 27470 (May 8, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-802).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         Since the proposal contained in the Proposed Rule Change was also filed as an advance notice, all public comments received on the proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are submitted on the Proposed Rule Change or Advance Notice.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Background</HD>
                <P>
                    As noted above, OCC proposes to adopt a written framework establishing OCC's approach to managing liquidity risk. This written framework, the Liquidity Risk Management Framework (“LRMF”), sets forth a comprehensive overview of OCC's liquidity risk management practices and governs OCC's policies and procedures as they relate to liquidity risk management. In connection with implementing the proposed LRMF, OCC proposes to make revisions to its current rules regarding how OCC (1) maintains sufficient liquidity resources to meet its settlement obligations; (2) addresses foreseeable liquidity shortfalls not covered by OCC's liquidity resources; (3) replenishes any of OCC's resources employed during a stress event; (4) undertakes due diligence of OCC's liquidity providers; and (5) requires each Clearing Member to have procedures to ensure operational capacity to meet its obligations arising from participation in OCC. OCC proposes to make conforming changes throughout its rules to effect the substance of the changes described below. Such changes would be made to OCC's Clearing Fund and Stress Testing Methodology (“Methodology Description”), Risk Management Framework Policy, Clearing Fund Methodology Policy, Collateral Risk Management Policy, Counterparty Credit Risk Management Policy (“CCRM Policy”), and Default Management Policy.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35447"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF describes the primary liquidity risks OCC faces when managing a Clearing Member default. To determine the amount of resources it needs, OCC assumes a two-day period of risk (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the period between a Clearing Member default and the settlement of the defaulted Clearing Member's obligations). According to OCC, the potential liquidity obligations arising from a Clearing Member default may include mark-to-market obligations on futures and stock loan positions, trade premiums, cash-settled exercise and assignment (“E&amp;A”) activity, auction payments, settlements resulting from the E&amp;A of physically-settled options, and funding of OCC's liquidation agents.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Such obligations would represent the specific liquidity risks that OCC would monitor, size, and manage as described in the LRMF. OCC would consider such potential obligations when determining its liquidity resources needs.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 23097.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF also describes factors that OCC would not consider when determining its liquidity resources needs. Such factors include margin deficits and other payments associated with a liquidation (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     brokerage, bank, and legal fees), which OCC states do not generally create immediate liquidity demands that could impede settlement. OCC also does not consider the costs it would directly bear to hedge open positions in its liquidity resource determinations because OCC's primary goal is to liquidate positions prior to the need for hedging. Additionally, the proposed LRMF identifies liquidity risks that OCC would mitigate through tools other than the application of liquidity resources. Such risks include the operational failure or disruption of OCC's liquidity providers, custodian, or settlement bank as well as potential concentration risks from key settlement banks and liquidity providers.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF identifies and defines the four categories of liquidity resources that OCC would maintain: (1) “Base Liquidity Resources,” (2) “Available Liquidity Resources,” (3) “Required Liquidity Resources,” and (4) “Other Liquidity Resources.” The proposed LRMF defines Base Liquidity Resources as assets that are readily available and convertible into cash through prearranged funding arrangements 
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and required Clearing Fund cash on deposit.
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed LRMF defines Available Liquidity Resources as OCC's Base Liquidity Resources plus Clearing Fund cash deposits in excess of the minimum required amount.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed LRMF defines OCC's Required Liquidity Resources, which are comprised of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources plus any amount of cash margin deposits of a Clearing Member Group required under the Contingency Funding Plan (described below). Finally, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's Other Liquidity Resources, which may or may not be available to OCC in a default situation (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     non-cash margin deposits of the defaulting Clearing Member, including letters of credit, Government Securities, and Government Sponsored Entity securities that may be liquidated for same-day or next day settlement).
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         OCC endeavors to maintain committed liquidity facilities with both bank and non-bank counterparties. OCC maintains a committed credit facility syndicated among various commercial banks. OCC also attempts to maintain committed repurchase agreements, which may be with either bank or non-bank counterparties.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         OCC's rules require Clearing Members to collectively contribute $3 billion in U.S. dollar cash to the Clearing Fund.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         OCC would only include excess cash deposits up to the amount the required Clearing Fund size exceeds the minimum Clearing Fund size as determined by OCC Rule 1001(b). Further, cash deposits in excess of a Clearing Member's total Clearing Fund requirement would not be included.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Sufficiency of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>The proposed changes include rules designed to ensure the sufficiency of OCC's liquidity resources. Such rules address the maintenance of liquidity resources designed to address a variety of stress scenarios through the sizing of such resources and the management of certain Clearing Member cash collateral withdrawals. The proposal also describes OCC's approach to liquidity stress testing more generally, including OCC's internal reporting processes related to liquidity stress testing.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Maintenance of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    To ensure that OCC identifies the appropriate amount of liquidity resources it should maintain, OCC's proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall approach to liquidity stress testing and liquidity resource sizing. OCC's approach for liquidity stress testing would rely on the stressed scenarios and prices generated under OCC's current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803). OCC's current methodology considers a range of stress scenarios and possible price changes in liquidation periods, including but not limited to: (1) Relevant peak historic price volatilities; (2) shifts in other market factors including, as appropriate, price determinants and yield curves; (3) the default of one or multiple members; (4) forward-looking stress scenarios; and (5) reverse stress tests aimed at identifying extreme default scenarios and extreme market conditions for which the OCC's resources would be insufficient. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 23098.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Under the proposal, OCC's Board of Directors (“Board”) would, at least annually, determine the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources based on a recommendation from the Risk Committee of OCC's Board (“RC”). The RC's recommendation would be based on an internal analysis summarizing OCC's projected liquidity demands under a variety of stress scenarios, including the sufficiency of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources against extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis, and certain scenarios used to size OCC's Clearing Fund.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         Such analysis would also consider the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC's stress testing system as well as the then current composition of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to revise how the Methodology Description describes key assumptions underlying OCC's calculation of its liquidity needs. Such assumptions include: (1) A two-day liquidation horizon; (2) the default of a Clearing Member sometime between the collection of collateral on a given day and settlement of Clearing Member obligations to OCC on the following day (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the day of default, “D”); (3) the gross calculation of cash-settled option liquidity demands due on the morning of D; (4) the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) normally guarantees the settlement of any E&amp;A transactions; (5) the accounting of liquidity demands as required by relevant cross-margin agreements; (6) that auction bids for a defaulting Clearing Member's portfolio are represented by stressed prices at the contract level; (7) that credits that occur on the first day of a liquidation persist and are available to offset debits on subsequent days; (8) that auction proceeds settle on D+2; (9) liquidity demands associated with Specific Wrong Way Risk (“SWWR”) positions are included in the appropriate calculations; 
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and (10) no early exercise of options occurs.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87673 (Dec. 6, 2019), 84 FR 67981 (Dec. 12, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-807); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718 (Dec. 11, 2019), 84 FR 68992 (Dec. 17, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-010).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         OCC believes standard expiration is generally more meaningful than early exercise risk when calculating the liquidity risk associated with E&amp;A activity. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 at 23101 n. 31. OCC provided data supporting this belief in a confidential Exhibit 3 to the Proposed Rule Change.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <PRTPAGE P="35448"/>
                <P>Under the proposal, OCC would also make certain assumptions regarding the treatment of positions and cash flows based on timing. OCC would assume that positions with an expiration date of D+1 or greater will be liquidated via auction, and that option positions expiring on D-1 or D would be liquidated through normal OCC cash settlement processes or through physical settlement at NSCC. Under the proposed approach, cash inflows would be assumed to reduce outflows only for later dates.</P>
                <P>
                    To facilitate the maintenance of identified and collected liquidity resources, OCC proposes to require a two-day notice period for the substitution of non-cash collateral for cash in the Clearing Fund. Currently, a Clearing Member may execute a same-day substitution of Government Securities 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     for cash deposits in the Clearing Fund. Where substitution would not cause a Clearing Member's settlement obligations to exceed the liquidity resources it has pledged to OCC, OCC would retain discretion to waive the proposed notice period. OCC stated that the proposed change is intended provide additional certainty around the level of liquidity resources available to OCC at any given time by fixing the amount of cash in the Clearing Fund, and thereby fixing the amount of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, for any given two-day liquidation horizon.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         OCC defines “Government Securities” as securities issued or guaranteed by the United States or Canadian Government, or by any other foreign government acceptable to the Corporation, except Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal Securities issued on Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (commonly called TIP-STRIPS). OCC By-Laws, Article I, Section 1.G.(5), available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.theocc.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/occ_bylaws.pdf.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 23103.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Liquidity Stress Testing</HD>
                <P>As noted above, OCC's liquidity stress testing would be based on output of its current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology. Daily, OCC performs stress tests designed to: (1) Determine whether OCC's collective financial resources are adequate to cover OCC's risk tolerance (“Adequacy Scenarios”); (2) establish the monthly size of the Clearing Fund based on the potential losses arising out of a 1-in-80 year hypothetical market event; (3) measure the exposure posed by individual Clearing Member Groups, and determine whether such exposure necessitates OCC calling for additional financial resources (“Sufficiency Scenarios”); and (4) monitor and assess the size of OCC's pre-funded financial resource against a wide range of stress scenarios that may include extreme but implausible and reverse stress testing scenarios (“Informational Scenarios”).</P>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to revise how the Methodology Description discusses OCC's stress testing and reporting processes to support the determination of its liquidity needs. OCC would change how it constructs portfolios for stress tests as well as how it aggregates stress test results consistent with the practices that OCC would follow in an actual liquidation of a defaulter's portfolio. Currently, OCC's processes focus on calculating the liquidating value of a portfolio. OCC proposes to revise its description of this process in its Methodology Description to highlight the importance of the timing of the cash flows during a liquidation because offsetting cash flows may occur on different days thus creating a liquidity demand during the process without a loss at the end of the process.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         OCC also proposes changes to clarify the structure of Clearing Member accounts. For example, Clearing Members maintain separate accounts for separate business types or cross-margining arrangements. Further, positions and collateral credited to a particular type of Clearing Member account (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         customer, firm or market-maker) may be subject to a lien in favor of OCC, and such liens (or lack thereof depending on the account) would be contemplated in OCC's portfolio construction and aggregation processes.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to rely on the output from its Sufficiency Scenarios and Adequacy Scenarios to evaluate its liquidity resources. Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would assess its Base Liquidity Resources against its Adequacy Scenarios. OCC's proposed processes for increasing its Base Liquidity Resources as needed are described below. Similarly, OCC would evaluate the sufficiency of its Available Liquidity Resources based on the Sufficiency Scenarios.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC's proposed process for evaluating and supplementing its Available Liquidity Resources is also described below. OCC also proposes to make other conforming and organizational changes to the Methodology Description to reflect the implementation of the new liquidity stress testing approach and make other non-substantive clarifications to the document.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         OCC also proposes to monitor and assess its liquidity resources under the Informational Scenarios. OCC would not be directly use the output of the Informational Scenarios to make decisions regarding the size of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         For example, OCC would reorganize the document to relocate content specific to credit stress testing to sections of the document focused only on credit stress testing. OCC is also making clarifying and conforming changes to differentiate the usage of Adequacy, Sizing, Sufficiency, and Informational Scenarios for credit and liquidity purposes. Further, OCC proposes changes to more accurately describe the scope of volatility instruments cleared by OCC.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        OCC proposes to clarify that in most SWWR stress test scenarios, SWWR Equity and ETN charges computed for margins are added to stress scenario profit and loss calculations in order to account for SWWR in the stress testing system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87673 (Dec. 6, 2019), 84 FR 67981 (Dec. 12, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-807) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718 (Dec. 11, 2019), 84 FR 68992 (Dec. 17, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-010). OCC also proposes removing duplicative language regarding Idiosyncratic Scenarios, Sizing Scenarios, and certain key assumptions from the executive summary of the Methodology Description because such information is covered in greater detail later in later sections of the document.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF also sets forth certain internal reporting processes related to OCC's liquidity stress testing. Daily, OCC staff would be required to review the output of OCC's liquidity stress tests, and such review could lead to a change in the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources. At least monthly, OCC staff would be required to develop and review reports detailing and analyzing OCC's daily stress tests.
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC would use the analysis provided in such reports to review the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC's stress tests. OCC staff would conduct such analyses more frequently than monthly when products cleared or markets served display high volatility or become less liquid, or when the size or concentration of positions held by OCC's participants increases significantly. OCC staff would be required to provide a summary of the results from its at least monthly review to OCC's Management Committee and the RC. At least annually, OCC staff would be required to assess the adequacy of OCC's stress testing methodology, and provide such assessment to the RC. Also at least annually, OCC staff would be required to perform a review of risk methodologies and the usage of any models to inform the management of liquidity risk.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         Additionally, OCC staff would develop internal reports regarding the sufficiency of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Foreseeable Shortfalls</HD>
                <P>
                    In determining the sufficiency of its liquidity resources as described above, OCC may identify a foreseeable liquidity shortfall. In such a situation, OCC's proposed changes provide OCC tools designed to address such foreseeable liquidity shortfalls not otherwise addressed by OCC's liquidity resources. The proposed LRMF contemplates mechanisms for increasing the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources. The proposed LRMF also describes OCC's plan for collecting additional resources 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35449"/>
                    when a Clearing Member Group's projected or actual liquidity risk exceeds certain thresholds (“Contingency Funding Plan”).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Increasing Base Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would maintain two tools by which it could increase its Base Liquidity Resources. As noted above, OCC maintains a committed credit facility with a syndicate of banks. The committed credit facility includes an uncommitted accordion feature,
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which OCC will endeavor to include in future iterations of the facility.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         An accordion is an uncommitted expansion of a credit facility generally on the same terms as a credit facility.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC also requires Clearing Members to collectively contribute $3 billion in cash to the Clearing Fund (“CF Cash Requirement”). OCC's current rules already authorize each of OCC's Executive Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Operating Officer (collectively, the “OCEO”) individually to increase the CF Cash Requirement on a temporary basis for the protection of OCC, Clearing Members or the general public.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC requires that such temporary increases be reviewed by the RC. OCC proposes to expand its authority to set and to temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement. OCC proposes to authorize its Board to adjust the CF Cash Requirement periodically except that the Board would not be permitted to set the CF Cash Requirement at an amount lower than $3 billion. OCC also proposes that the OCEO may temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement to respond to changing business or market conditions,
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and to require that the RCs' review of such an increase must (i) be based upon then-existing facts and circumstances, (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system, and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC also proposes to require that any increase in the CF Cash Requirement be satisfied no later than the second business day following notification unless the Clearing Member is notified by an officer of OCC an alternative time to satisfy such obligation.
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         OCC utilized this authority in December 2019 when it informed Clearing Members that OCC would exercise this authority on January 3, 2020 to increase the CF Cash Requirement temporarily from $3 billion to $3.5 billion during the monthly sizing of the Clearing Fund. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88120 (Feb. 5, 2020), 85 FR 7812, 7814 n. 20 (Feb. 11, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-801).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         OCC also proposes shifting the location of such authorization in its rules from Rule 1002 to the proposed LRMF.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         The criteria proposed for the RC's review are currently the criteria required for a member of the OCEO to authorize a temporary increase.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         OCC currently requires such temporary increases to be satisfied no later than one hour before the close of Fedwire on the business day following notification by OCC. OCC stated that the change is designed to provide more clarity and simplicity by more closely aligning the timeframes for meeting an increase in the CF Cash Requirement with the timing for satisfying Clearing Fund deficits in the monthly and intra-month sizing processes. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 23103.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Addressing Shortfalls in Available Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    Currently, OCC forecasts daily settlement obligations 30 days prior to a given settlement under normal market conditions and compares such demands to its resources. Based on such analysis, OCC may require a Clearing Member to deposit intra-day margin in the form of cash so that OCC's liquid financial resources would be sufficient to cover the Clearing Member's obligations. OCC proposes to replace its current forecasting process with an analysis of OCC's resources measured against the output of its Sufficiency Scenarios. Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would take specific actions in the event that the output of its Sufficiency Scenarios for a given Clearing Member Group were to exceed one of two thresholds. Where OCC observes that the output of a Sufficiency Scenario is in excess of 80 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, OCC would initiate enhanced monitoring of the Clearing Member Group's liquidity demand.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Where OCC observes that the output of a Sufficiency Scenario is in excess of 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, OCC could require the Clearing Member Group to provide additional cash collateral (“Required Cash Deposits”).
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC proposes to amend its rules such that a Required Cash Deposit could be imposed either as part of OCC's normal daily margin process or as a special intra-day margin call.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         OCC described the process comprising such enhanced monitoring in a confidential Exhibit 3G provided as part of the proposal.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         The amount of a Required Cash Deposit would be equal to 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources less the relevant output of OCC's Sufficiency Scenario. Such a Required Cash Deposit could be provided as a substitute for non-cash collateral. OCC would generally require funding of Required Cash Deposits five business days before the date of the projected demand but may require funding up to 20 business days before the projected date as facts and circumstances may warrant.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         As proposed, OCC would generally require funding of Required Cash Deposits five business days before the date of the projected demand but could require funding up to 20 business days before the projected date.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Similar to margin calls designed to ensure the sufficiency of OCC's financial resources, OCC proposes to establish two thresholds for monitoring the potential impact of a Required Cash Deposit on the relevant Clearing Member.
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     If the Required Cash Deposit for an individual Clearing Member were to exceed $500 million or 75 percent of the Clearing Member's excess net capital, OCC staff would be required to notify OCC's OCEO. If the Required Cash Deposit for an individual Clearing Member were to exceed 100 percent of the Clearing Member's excess net capital, OCC staff would escalate the matter to the OCEO, any member of which would be authorized to approve such Required Cash Deposit. The thresholds described above would be subject to annual review and approval by the RC. Additionally, each member of the OCEO would be authorized to approve temporary changes to the thresholds described above.
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37858 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37572-73 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         The RC would be obligated to review any temporary change in thresholds within 20 days of the change to determine whether to make such change a permanent part of OCC's rules. The RC's determination must (i) be based upon then-existing facts and circumstances, (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system, and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would also have authority to impose Required Cash Deposits as a protective measure against a Clearing Member subject to enhanced monitoring and surveillance pursuant to OCC's watch level reporting process because OCC determines that the Clearing Member presents increased credit risk.
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Specifically, OCC proposes to authorize such a requirement by adopting new Rule 604(g). Under the proposed rule, a Clearing Member may be required to satisfy such required cash deposits through its daily margin requirements under Rule 601 or through intra-day margin calls under Rule 609.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         OCC's watch level reporting process is outlined in its Counterparty Credit Risk Management Policy. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82312 (Dec. 13, 2017), 82 FR 60242 (Dec. 19, 2017) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-009).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Replenishment of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    OCC's proposed changes include rules describing OCC's process for replenishing liquidity resources employed during a stress event. The proposal includes clarification of OCC's authority to borrow cash collateral from the Clearing Fund. The proposal also clarifies OCC's authority to reject substitutions that would affect non-cash 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35450"/>
                    Clearing Fund collateral that has been used to access OCC's liquidity facilities. Additionally, OCC proposes changes to its rules to allow for the more timely declaration and allocation of certain losses charged to the Clearing Fund.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The cash contributions to OCC's Clearing Fund serve as an important source of liquidity for OCC to manage potential liquidity risks associated with a Clearing Member default or the failure or operational disruption of a bank or securities or commodities clearing organization. Currently, OCC's rules permit OCC to use the Clearing Fund for borrowing or otherwise obtaining funds to be used for liquidity purposes. OCC has stated, however, that it would likely not use Clearing Fund cash as collateral for a loan from a third-party.
                    <SU>31</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Rather, OCC would directly borrow Clearing Fund cash to manage the financial obligations of a defaulted Clearing Member. OCC proposes to amend its rules to clarify its authority to borrow directly from the Clearing Fund.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>31</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 23106.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The non-cash contributions to OCC's Clearing Fund provide a source of collateral necessary for OCC to access sources of liquidity such as OCC's liquidity facilities described above. Clearing Members may, from time to time, substitute new collateral for collateral already contributed to the Clearing Fund. OCC proposes to amend its rules to clarify its authority to reject substitutions that would affect collateral that OCC has already pledged as collateral to access its liquidity facilities.</P>
                <P>Under OCC's rules, amounts obtained through borrowing from the Clearing Fund are not considered losses charged against the Clearing Fund for a period of 30 days. Any transaction collateralized by Clearing Fund contributions that is outstanding for more than 30 days is considered an actual loss that OCC would then allocate to its Clearing Members, who would then be required to replenish the Clearing Fund. OCC proposes to amend its rules to authorize OCC to determine that an outstanding transaction collateralized by Clearing Fund contributions is a loss to be allocated to Clearing Members, even if that transaction has been outstanding for less than 30 days, which in turn would allow OCC to allocate the loss and replenish the Clearing Fund in a timely manner.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">D. Due Diligence of Liquidity Providers</HD>
                <P>
                    OCC's ability to manage its liquidity risk is dependent on a supporting institutions, such as settlement banks, custodian banks, central banks, and liquidity providers. The proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall framework for monitoring, managing, and limiting its risks and exposures to these supporting institutions.
                    <SU>32</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     This framework includes onboarding and monitoring processes, including: (1) Conducting due diligence to confirm each commercial institution meets OCC's financial and operational standards; (2) confirming each commercial institution's access to liquidity to meet its commitments to OCC; (3) monitoring and managing direct, affiliated, and concentrated exposures; and (4) conducting operational reviews of such institutions. The proposed LRMF also sets forth OCC's requirements for performing due diligence to confirm it has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers has (1) sufficient information to understand and manage the potential liquidity demands of OCC and its associated liquidity risk and (2) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments to OCC, including the execution of periodic test borrows no less than once every 12 months to measure the performance and reliability of the liquidity facilities. Further, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's use of accounts and services at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago to custody funds to reduce counterparty credit risks.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>32</SU>
                         OCC's framework for monitoring, managing, and limiting its risks and exposures to these supporting institutions is primarily governed by OCC's CCRM. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82312 (Dec. 13, 2017), 82 FR 60242 (Dec. 19, 2017) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-009).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">E. Participant Capacity</HD>
                <P>
                    Currently, OCC requires that each Clearing Member have access to sufficient financial resources to meet obligations arising from clearing membership in extreme but plausible market conditions. OCC's rules do not address circumstances in which a Clearing Member has sufficient resources to meet its obligations but is unable to meet settlement obligations due to a failure or operational issue at its primary settlement bank. OCC proposes to require that each Clearing Member maintain adequate procedures, including but not limited to contingency funding, to ensure that it is able to meet its liquidity obligations as OCC members.
                    <SU>33</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>33</SU>
                         OCC regularly examines its Clearing Members for adherence to similar obligations arising out of OCC's membership requirements in connection with its existing annual Clearing Member examination process.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act directs the Commission to approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization.
                    <SU>34</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     After carefully considering the Proposed Rule Change, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to OCC. More specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act
                    <SU>35</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7) and (18) thereunder.
                    <SU>36</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>34</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>35</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>36</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act</HD>
                <P>
                    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
                    <SU>37</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Based on its review of the record, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Proposed Rule Change are consistent with the promotion of prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions for the reasons described below.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>37</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to adopt rules describing OCC's (i) primary liquidity risks; (ii) liquidity resources; (iii) requirements for liquidity provider due diligence; and (iv) requirements for procedures designed to ensure Clearing Member capacity to meet liquidity obligations arising out of participation in OCC. The Commission believes that having rules and policies that clearly determine and describe OCC's liquidity risks and resources would facilitate OCC's ability to size its liquidity resources commensurate with the risks it faces. OCC proposes to size and test the sufficiency of its liquidity resources based on its current credit stress tests, which include extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Additionally, to support the application of OCC's current financial resource stress testing methodology to the management of liquidity risk, OCC proposes to revise its Methodology Description to describe the key assumptions underlying the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35451"/>
                    calculation of OCC's liquidity needs. The Commission believes that measuring the sufficiency of OCC's resources based on extreme historical scenarios would support OCC's ability to manage such scenarios should they arise again. Further, the Commission believes that the incorporation of the key assumptions described above would strengthen OCC's understanding of its ability to meet its settlement obligations on time and in the required currency. Further, the proposal would require daily, monthly, and annual liquidity stress test-related reporting. The Commission believes that such reporting is necessary to provide risk management information to decision-makers within OCC because it would allow OCC to monitor its liquidity exposures under a variety of foreseeable stress scenarios, and to call for additional liquid resources in the form of cash deposits to ensure that OCC continues to maintain sufficient liquid resources to meet its settlement obligations with a high degree of confidence. Finally, the proposal would require OCC to conduct due diligence of its liquidity providers and would require each Clearing Member to maintain policies and procedures to ensure its ability to meet its obligations arising out of participation in OCC. The Commission believes that such due diligence and membership requirements would allow OCC to more closely monitor the financial and operational capacity of its liquidity providers and Clearing Members. Such monitoring, in turn, would increase the likelihood that liquidity resources would be available to OCC when necessary.
                </P>
                <P>
                    OCC is the only clearing agency for standardized U.S. securities options listed on Commission-registered national securities exchanges (“listed options”).
                    <SU>38</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Strengthening OCC's overall approach to liquidity risk management, strengthens OCC's ability to manage Clearing Member defaults, which, in turn, facilitates the clearance and settlement of listed options. The Commission believes that the Proposed Rule Change would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and is, therefore, consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>39</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>38</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85121 (Feb. 13, 2019), 84 FR 5157 (Feb. 20, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2015-02).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>39</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) Under the Exchange Act</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Exchange Act requires that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively measure, monitor, and manage the liquidity risk that arises in or is borne by the covered clearing agency, including measuring, monitoring, and managing its settlement and funding flows on an ongoing and timely basis, and its use of intraday liquidity.
                    <SU>40</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>40</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Consistency With Sections (i), (vi), and (vii) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to require the maintenance of sufficient liquid resources at the minimum in all relevant currencies to effect same-day and, where appropriate, intraday and multiday settlement of payment obligations with a high degree of confidence under a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios that includes, but is not limited to, the default of the participant family that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation for the covered clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions.
                    <SU>41</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>41</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.A.1., the Propose Rule Change includes OCC's method for sizing its liquidity resources. First, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall approach to liquidity stress testing and liquidity resource sizing by relying on the stressed scenarios and prices generated under OCC's current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology, which the Commission has reviewed closely and believes would be consistent with identifying a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios.
                    <SU>42</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Specifically, the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources would be based upon an internal analysis summarizing OCC's liquidity demands under a variety of stress scenarios, including the sufficiency of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources against extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Second, OCC proposes to describe key assumptions underlying the calculation of its liquidity needs—such as a two-day liquidation horizon—as well as the treatment of cash flows such that cash inflows would be assumed to reduce outflows only for later dates. Finally, OCC would impose a two-day notice requirement on substitutions of Clearing Fund collateral to ensure access to cash Clearing Fund contributions throughout the two-day liquidation period. Taken together, the Commission believes that these proposed changes are reasonably designed to ensure that OCC sizes and maintains it liquidity resources consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>43</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>42</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37862-63 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37577-78 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>43</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to determine the amount and regularly test the sufficiency of its liquid resources held for purposes of meeting the minimum liquid resource requirement under paragraph (e)(7)(i) of this section by, at a minimum: (A) Conducting stress testing of its liquidity resources at least once each day using standard and predetermined parameters and assumptions; (B) conducting a comprehensive analysis on at least a monthly basis of the existing stress testing scenarios, models, and underlying parameters and assumptions used in evaluating liquidity needs and resources, and considering modifications to ensure they are appropriate for determining the clearing agency's identified liquidity needs and resources in light of current and evolving market conditions; (C) conducting a comprehensive analysis of the scenarios, models, and underlying parameters and assumptions used in evaluating liquidity needs and resources more frequently than monthly when the products cleared or markets served display high volatility or become less liquid, when the size or concentration of positions held by the clearing agency's participants increases significantly, or in other appropriate circumstances described in such policies and procedures; and (D) reporting the results of its analyses under Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(B) and (C) to appropriate decision makers at the covered clearing agency, including but not limited to, its risk management committee or board of directors, and using these results to evaluate the adequacy of and adjust its liquidity risk management methodology, model parameters, and any other relevant aspects of its liquidity risk 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35452"/>
                    management framework.
                    <SU>44</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to ensure the performance of model validation of its liquidity risk models not less than annually or more frequently as may be contemplated by the covered clearing agency's risk management framework.
                    <SU>45</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>44</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>45</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.A.2., OCC proposes to implement liquidity stress testing based on the output of its current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology. After reviewing and assessing the proposal, including the methodology and results of OCC's proposed application of such output to its new liquidity stress testing approach, the Commission believes that the proposed changes described above are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) because OCC would assess its Base and Available Liquidity Resources against a set of stress scenarios, including extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Further, the key assumptions described above in section II.A.1. would facilitate the application of OCC's current Clearing Fund stress testing outputs to the management of liquidity risk in a manner that would be consistent with OCC's management of credit risk. The Commission continues to believe that OCC current stress testing methodology improved the testing of OCC's financial resources and increased the likelihood that OCC maintains sufficient resources at all times.
                    <SU>46</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Similarly, the Commission believes that the application of such a methodology to liquidity risk management would improve the testing of OCC's liquidity resources and increase the likelihood that OCC maintains sufficient liquid resources at all times. Further, the Commission believes that applying a consistent risk management approach across OCC's credit and liquidity risk exposures would support OCC's ability to maintain a more consistent, comprehensive view of its risk management processes more broadly.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>46</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No.83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37578 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Additionally, the Commission believes that the daily review of liquidity stress tests, which may lead to a change in OCC's Base Liquidity Resources would be consistent with the daily stress testing requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(A). Similarly, the Commission believes that the at least monthly analysis of daily stress tests for review of the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC stress tests with more frequent analysis as required would be consistent with the monthly comprehensive analysis requirements set forth in Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(B) and (C). Likewise, the Commission believes that providing a summary of such monthly reporting, as well as an annual assessment of the adequacy of OCC's liquidity resources based on such reporting, to OCC's Management Committee and the RC would be consistent with the reporting requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(D). Finally, the Commission believes that the review of risk methodologies and the usage of any models to inform the management of liquidity risk at least annually would be consistent with the model validation requirements set forth in Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii).</P>
                <P>
                    Taken together and for the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes that proposed approach to liquidity stress testing and reporting is consistent with the requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) and (vii) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>47</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>47</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) and (vii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Consistency With Section (viii) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to address foreseeable liquidity shortfalls that would not be covered by the covered clearing agency's liquid resources and avoid unwinding, revoking, or delaying the same-day settlement of payment obligations.
                    <SU>48</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>48</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>As described above in section II.B.1., OCC proposes to revise the available mechanisms for increasing its Base Liquidity Resources. The Commission believes such changes would be consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) because they would allow OCC to address settlement obligations that could exceed its Base Liquidity Resources, which could otherwise lead to liquidity shortfalls. Specifically, by allowing OCC's Board to adjust the CF Cash Requirement, OCC would be able to adjust to increases in its liquidity needs by acquiring additional pre-funded liquidity resources. Similarly, the Commission believes that the proposed changes to the OCEO's authority to temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement would allow OCC to quickly react to changes in both OCC's liquidity needs and liquidity resources while still preserving the required analysis and existing factors that OCC must consider under its current rules.</P>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.B.2., OCC proposes a new Contingency Funding Plan, which would be described in OCC's rules. The Commission believes that OCC's proposed Contingency Funding Plan would be consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) because it would allow OCC to collect additional liquidity resources to address settlement obligations that could exceed OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, which could otherwise lead to liquidity shortfalls. In particular, the Contingency Funding Plan would provide for enhanced monitoring of any Clearing Member Group whose projected liquidity exposures under OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios exceed 80 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources. Such monitoring should, in turn, facilitate OCC's ability to take further action as necessary, for example by temporarily increasing OCC's CF Cash Requirement. The Contingency Funding Plan would also provide OCC with additional liquidity resources in the form of cash margin deposits in the event that either (i) a Clearing Member Group's projected liquidity exposures under OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios exceed 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources or (ii) it becomes necessary to impose protective measures on a Clearing Member on OCC's Watch List.
                    <SU>49</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>49</SU>
                         Such authority would be tempered by OCC's monitoring of the potential effect of calling for such resources based on the absolute value of the requirement as well as the size of the requirement relative to the affected Clearing Member's excess net capital.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Taken together and for the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes that proposed changes authorizing OCC to collect liquidity resources to address settlement obligations that could exceed its Base or Available Liquidity Resources are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>50</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>50</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">3. Consistency With Section (ix) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to effectively manage liquidity risk by, at a minimum, describing the covered clearing agency's process to replenish any liquid resources that the clearing agency may employ during a stress event.
                    <SU>51</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>51</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <PRTPAGE P="35453"/>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.C., OCC proposes to clarify and amend its rules related to borrowing Clearing Fund collateral. Specifically, OCC proposes to clarify its authority to borrow cash directly from the Clearing Fund and to reject substitution requests that would require the withdrawal of non-cash collateral that OCC has pledged to access a liquidity facility. The proposal would also authorize OCC to charge as a loss amounts obtained through borrowing against the Clearing Fund earlier than currently permitted under OCC's rules, thereby permitting OCC to require Clearing Members to provide collateral to replenish the Clearing Fund earlier than would otherwise be permitted under its existing rules. Taken together, the Commission believes that the proposed changes concerning OCC borrowing of Clearing Fund collateral and losses related to such borrowing are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>52</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>52</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">4. Consistency With Section (iv) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to require the undertaking of due diligence to confirm that it has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers, whether or not such liquidity provider is a clearing member, has: (A) Sufficient information to understand and manage the liquidity provider's liquidity risks; and (B) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments to provide liquidity to the covered clearing agency.
                    <SU>53</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>53</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.D., the proposed LRMF explicitly contemplates OCC's due diligence for supporting institutions, including liquidity providers, to confirm OCC has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers has (1) sufficient information to understand and manage the potential liquidity demands of OCC and its associated liquidity risk and (2) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments. Such due diligence would include the execution of periodic tests at least once every 12 months to measure the performance and reliability of OCC's liquidity facilities. The Commission believes that proposed rules setting forth such due diligence requirements are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>54</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>54</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Accordingly, the Commission believes that implementation of Proposed Rule Change would be consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>55</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>55</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) Under the Exchange Act</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to establish objective, risk-based, and publicly disclosed criteria for participation, which require participants to have sufficient financial resources and robust operational capacity to meet obligations arising from participation in the clearing agency.
                    <SU>56</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>56</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.E., OCC proposes to require that each Clearing Member maintain adequate procedures, including but not limited to contingency funding. More specifically, the proposed change would require Clearing Members to maintain procedures to address a failure or operational issue at a Clearing Member's settlement bank. Such a requirement would be in addition to the current requirement that Clearing Members have access to sufficient financial resources to meet obligations arising from clearing membership in extreme but plausible market conditions. The Commission believes that requiring Clearing Members to maintain such procedures would help to ensure that Clearing Members have the operational capacity to meet obligations arising from participation in OCC. The Commission believes, therefore, that the proposed change is consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>57</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>57</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Conclusion</HD>
                <P>
                    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act, and in particular, the requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act 
                    <SU>58</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and the rules and regulations thereunder.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>58</SU>
                         In approving this Proposed Rule Change, the Commission has considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered,</E>
                     pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,
                    <SU>59</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the Proposed Rule Change (SR-OCC-2020-003) be, and hereby is, approved.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>59</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>60</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>60</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12519 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89010; File No. SR-BX-2020-007]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Assume Operational Responsibility for Certain Enforcement Functions Currently Performed by FINRA Under the Exchanges Authority and Supervision</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 16, 2020, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (“BX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to assume operational responsibility for certain enforcement functions currently performed by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) under the Exchange's authority and supervision. On April 23, 2020, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which amended and replaced the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 30, 2020.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission did not receive any comment letters on the proposed rule change. The Commission is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88746 (April 24, 2020), 85 FR 24064 (“Release”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 1</HD>
                <P>
                    According to the Exchange, since its acquisition by The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., the Exchange has contracted with FINRA through various regulatory services agreements (“RSAs”) to perform certain regulatory functions on its behalf.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     At the same time, the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35454"/>
                    Exchange retained operational responsibility for a number of regulatory functions, including real-time surveillance, qualification of companies listed on the Exchange, and most surveillance related to its affiliated options markets.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In June 2019, the Exchange reallocated operational responsibility from FINRA to BX Regulation for certain investigative and enforcement activity, including the investigation and enforcement responsibilities for conduct occurring on The BX Options Market,
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and investigation and enforcement responsibilities for conduct occurring on BX's equity market only, 
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     not also on non-Nasdaq-affiliated equities markets.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     According to the Exchange, notwithstanding the changes made in June 2019, FINRA continues to perform certain functions pursuant to an RSA,
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     including the handling of contested disciplinary proceedings arising out of BX Regulation-led investigation and enforcement activities.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         According to the Exchange, as appropriate, BX Regulation coordinates with other SROs to the extent it is investigating activity occurring on non-Nasdaq options markets to ensure no regulatory duplication occurs. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065 fn.9.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86051 (June 6, 2019), 84 FR 27387 (June 12, 2019).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         In addition to work performed pursuant to a RSA, FINRA also performs work for matters covered by agreements to allocate regulatory responsibility under Rule 17d-2 of the Act. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065 fn.11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange now proposes to reallocate operational responsibility from FINRA to BX Regulation for certain enforcement activity, specifically, the handling of certain contested disciplinary proceedings.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that it anticipates handling those contested disciplinary proceedings that FINRA is unable or unwilling to handle due to strained resources or other similar limitations.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Furthermore, the Exchange states that in all cases, the Exchange will continue to use FINRA's Office of Hearing Officers to administer the hearing process, and that the rules applicable to the disciplinary process will remain the same.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065. The Exchange states that BX Regulation's decision to assume operational responsibility for any given contested disciplinary proceeding with be made on a case by case basis. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065 fn.14. Furthermore, the Exchange states that for those contested disciplinary proceedings that BX Regulation does not assume operational responsibility for, the Exchange will continue to use FINRA to litigate those matters. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065 fn.12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and, in particular, with Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(7) of the Act.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As noted above, since its acquisition by The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., the Exchange has contracted with FINRA through various regulatory services agreements to perform certain regulatory functions on its behalf.
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     BX General Rule 2, Section 7 requires that, unless BX obtains prior Commission approval, the regulatory functions subject to RSAs in effect at the time when BX executed the FINRA Regulatory Contract must at all times continue to be performed by FINRA or an affiliate thereof or by another independent self-regulatory organization. The Exchange now proposes to reallocate operational responsibility for the certain contested disciplinary activities discussed above from FINRA to BX Regulation.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5), (7).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See supra</E>
                         note 4 and accompanying text.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See supra</E>
                         notes 9 and 10 and accompanying text.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that the Exchange could leverage its knowledge of its markets and members, its experience with investigation and enforcement work, and its surveillance, investigation, and enforcement staff, in helping to effectively, efficiently, and with immediacy, litigate certain contested disciplinary proceeds.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission also notes that, as discussed above, the proposal would not change or alter in any way the disciplinary process around how contested matters are handled, and FINRA's Office of Hearing Officers will continue to administer the hearing process for all contested disciplinary proceedings.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Furthermore, as the Exchange states, by assuming operational responsibility for certain contested disciplinary proceedings, the Exchange may be able to deliver increased efficiencies in the regulation of its markets and to act promptly and provide more effective regulation by enabling timely and more efficient action.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Act.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Release, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 3, at 24065.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">VI. Conclusion</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered,</E>
                     pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the proposed rule change (SR-BX-2020-007), as modified by Amendment No. 1 be, and hereby is, approved.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>20</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>20</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12516 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89007; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2020-010]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend the Rule Relating to MidPoint Discretionary Orders To Allow Optional Offset or Quote Depletion Protection Instructions</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On February 19, 2020, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to amend EDGX Rule 11.8(g), which describes the handling of MidPoint Discretionary Orders entered on the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on March 6, 2020.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On April 16, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.
                    <FTREF/>
                    <SU>5</SU>
                      
                    <PRTPAGE P="35455"/>
                    On May 19, 2020, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which replaced and superseded the proposed rule change as originally filed.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission received no comment letters on the proposal. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88309 (March 2, 2020), 85 FR 13193.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88663, 85 FR 22474 (April 22, 2020). The Commission designated June 4, 2020 as the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or 
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised the proposal to: (1) Modify the circumstances that would enable or refresh a QDP active period (
                        <E T="03">see infra</E>
                         note 15); (2) set the QDP active period as 2 milliseconds; (3) include additional justification in support of the proposed rule change, including data in support of the QDP functionality; and (4) make technical and conforming changes. Amendment No. 1 is available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboeedgx-2020-010/srcboeedgx2020010-7240756-217167.pdf.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 1</HD>
                <P>
                    A MidPoint Discretionary Order (“MDO”) is a limit order that is executable at the national best bid (“NBB”) for an order to buy or the national best offer (“NBO”) for an order to sell while resting on the EDGX Book,
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     with discretion to execute at prices to and including the midpoint of the national best bid or offer (“NBBO”).
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange proposes to amend EDGX Rule 11.8(g) to introduce two optional instructions that Users 
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     would be able to include on MDOs entered on the Exchange. First, the Exchange would allow Users to enter MDOs with an offset to the NBBO, similar to orders entered with a Primary Peg Instruction today.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Second, the Exchange would allow Users to enter MDOs that include a Quote Depletion Protection (“QDP”) instruction that would disable discretion (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the order's ability to execute at a more aggressive price than its ranked price) for a limited period in certain circumstances where the best bid or offer displayed on the EDGX Book is executed below one round lot.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The “EDGX Book” is the electronic file of orders for the Exchange's trading system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGX Rule 1.5(d).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGX Rule 11.8(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         A “User” is any member or sponsored participant who is authorized to obtain access to the Exchange's trading system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGX Rule 1.5(ee).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGX Rule 11.6(j)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Offset Instruction</HD>
                <P>
                    As proposed, MDOs entered with an offset would function in the same manner as currently implemented for Primary Peg orders entered with an offset pursuant to Rule 11.6(j)(2). First, a User entering an MDO would be able to select an offset equal to or greater than one minimum price variation (“MPV”) above or below the NBB or NBO to which the order is pegged (“Offset Amount”). Second, the Offset Amount for an MDO that is to be displayed on the EDGX Book would need to result in the price of such order being inferior to or equal to the inside quote on the same side of the market.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The offset functionality would be an optional feature that Users could include when entering an MDO for trading on the Exchange.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         An MDO defaults to a displayed instruction unless the User includes a non-displayed instruction on the order. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGX Rule 11.8(g)(4). Similar to the current handling of orders entered with a Primary Peg instruction, the Exchange is not proposing to accept displayed MDOs with an aggressive offset at this time. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 5 n.6.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Exchange proposes to make conforming changes to EDGX Rule 11.8(g) to account for the offset functionality. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend language in the introductory paragraph to Rule 11.8(g) and subparagraphs (g)(6) and (8).
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     According to the Exchange, these changes reflect the proposed operation of MDOs entered with an offset and would not otherwise impact the handling of MDOs entered on the Exchange.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         For a detailed description of these proposed changes, 
                        <E T="03">see</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 6-7.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 7.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Quote Depletion Protection</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange also proposes to introduce QDP, an optional instruction that Users could enable on an MDO to limit the order's ability to exercise discretion in certain circumstances.
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The QDP feature would do this by tracking significant executions of orders that constitute the best bid or offer on EDGX.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As proposed, a “QDP Active Period” would be enabled or refreshed for buy (sell) MDOs if the best bid (offer) displayed on the EDGX Book is executed below one round lot.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     When a QDP Active Period is initially enabled, or refreshed by a subsequent execution of the best bid (offer) then displayed on the EDGX Book, it would remain enabled for two milliseconds.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     During this QDP Active Period, an MDO entered with a QDP instruction would not exercise discretion. Instead, such an order would be only be executable at its ranked price.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The ranked price is always executable unless the User cancels the order from the book.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         Proposed changes related to the introduction of the QDP instruction are reflected in proposed subparagraph (10) under EDGX Rule 11.8(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         The Exchange initially proposed that the QDP Active Period also could be enabled or refreshed in certain circumstances by significant cancellations. Amendment No. 1 removed this aspect of the proposal.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         Rule 611 of Regulation NMS generally limits executions to prices that are at or better than the protected best bid or offer. However, there are circumstances, such as the use of intermarket sweep orders, where an order may be executed at an inferior price. In these circumstances, an execution of the EDGX BBO below one round lot would trigger a QDP Active Period even though that quotation is inferior to the NBBO. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.10.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         The QDP Active Period would always last for at least two milliseconds. If the QDP Active Period is refreshed by a subsequent execution, such execution would result in a new two millisecond timer being started. Although the MDO would not exercise discretion during the QDP Active Period, its priority would not be impacted, and any applicable priority at its pegged price would be retained when QDP is enabled. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         An MDO's ranked price is the order's displayed or non-displayed pegged price, which may or may not include an offset, as proposed, or the order's limit price if that limit price is less aggressive than the applicable pegged price. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Unless the User chooses otherwise, an MDO to buy (sell) entered with a QDP instruction would default to a non-displayed instruction and would include an Offset Amount equal to one MPV below (above) the NBB (NBO).
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         The Exchange also proposes to amend EDGX Rule 11.8(g)(4) to reflect the fact that MDOs entered with a QDP instruction would default to non-displayed. MDOs that are not entered with the QDP instruction would continue to default to a displayed instruction, as currently provided in EDGX Rule 11.8(g)(4). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 9 n.13.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, and not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    EDGX proposes to introduce optional instructions that (1) would allow Users to enter MDOs with an offset to the NBB 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35456"/>
                    or NBO and (2) enter MDOs with a QDP instruction that would disable discretion for 2 milliseconds where the best bid or offer displayed on the EDGX Book is executed below one round lot. The Exchange asserts that similar offset functionality is already available on the Exchange in both the Primary Peg order type and the Discretionary Range instruction. EDGX further believes that the flexibility to specify an offset would be beneficial for market participants that require additional discretion to manage their order flow on the Exchange.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The Exchange states that the QDP instruction is intended to provide Users with a protective feature that limits an order's ability to exercise discretion in certain circumstances that may indicate that the market is moving against the resting MDO.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange provided data for a ten day period that tested the potential performance of the proposed QDP instruction in protecting Users from a potential negative price move by observing market movements in the two milliseconds following instances where QDP would have been enabled due to the execution of the EDGX best bid or offer. The Exchange concluded that the data showed: (1) MDOs entered with a QDP instruction could benefit from avoiding potentially impactful executions within the order's discretionary range when there are impending price moves; and (2) even though the market might remain static after QDP is enabled, the opportunity cost for disabling discretion in those circumstances is small as QDP would only be enabled for a limited period of time during the trading day.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment No. 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 17-18.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that the QDP feature is reasonably designed to allow market participants who utilize MDOs the opportunity to avoid an unfavorable execution when the market moves against a resting MDO. In reaching this conclusion, the Commission evaluated the proposed rule change and the data provided by the Exchange demonstrating correlation between the operation of the QDP feature and price instability on the EDGX market. In particular, the data indicates that: (i) There is a reasonable likelihood that the market will move against a resting MDO or remain static during a QDP Active Period; and (ii) a QDP Active Period would be active on average less than a half second per trading day per symbol. In addition, the QDP instruction is designed so that, during the QDP Active Period, only the discretion to execute at a more aggressive price would be suppressed and therefore an MDO, whether displayed or non-displayed, would still be accessible to liquidity takers at its ranked price. Finally, no User would be required to use either of the two proposed order instructions for the MDO (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     NBBO offset and QDP); it is optional functionality that would be available to Users who believe it may better effect their trading strategies. Therefore, the Commission believes that providing market participants the ability to use this optional tool to potentially improve the quality of their executions would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The Commission also notes that there is current, existing functionality for discretionary orders that is similar, although not identical, to both the offset and QDP instructions on the Exchange 
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and other national securities exchanges.
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     For the NBBO offset in particular, the Commission notes that the proposed offset instruction is a close variant of the discretion and pegging functionality that the Commission has approved under past exchange proposals.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     These functionalities continue to exist on the Exchange and on other exchanges.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         EDGX Rule 11.6(j)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         IEX Rule 11.190(b)(10), Nasdaq Rule 4703(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73468 (Oct. 29, 2014), 79 FR 65450 (Nov. 4, 2014).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         EDGX Rule 11.6(d); EDGX Rule 11.6(j)(2); Nasdaq Rule 4703(g). The Commission notes that the Exchange and other exchanges offer order types or instructions that would permit an order with discretion or an order with pegging functionality (or both, in some cases) to rest more passively on the exchange's book (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         further away from the NBB or NBO). As noted above, the Exchange offers both a Discretionary Range instruction (which would allow a discretionary order to rest passively) and a Primary Peg instruction (which would allow an order to be pegged one or more MPVs away from the NBB or NBO). Other exchange rules permit a discretionary order to be combined with a pegged order and would allow for a passive offset. 
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         Nasdaq Rule 4703(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Commission believes that this proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Exchange Act. The Commission believes that the proposed rule change is reasonably designed to promote fair and orderly markets, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ); or
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov.</E>
                     Please include File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-010 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper Comments</HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.</P>
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-010. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-010, and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35457"/>
                </FP>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1</HD>
                <P>
                    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No. 1 in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange further revised the proposal to: (1) Modify the circumstances that would enable or refresh a QDP active period; (2) set the QDP active period as 2 milliseconds; (3) include additional justification in support of the proposed rule change, including data in support of the QDP functionality; and (4) make technical and conforming changes. The changes and additional information in Amendment No. 1 add additional clarity to the original substance of the proposed rule change. In addition, the content of Amendment No. 1 assists the Commission's determination of whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">VI. Conclusion</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered</E>
                    , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the proposed rule change (SR-CboeEDGX-2020-010), as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>29</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>29</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12514 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89015; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-29]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, To Modify Rule 967NY Regarding the Treatment of Orders Subject to Trade Collar Protection</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 9, 2020, NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to modify Exchange Rule 967NY regarding the treatment of orders subject to Trade Collar Protection. The Exchange submitted Amendment No. 2, which superseded and replaced the proposed rule change, on April 23, 2020.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 30, 2020.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78a.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         Amendment No. 2 is available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyseamer-2020-29/srnyseamer202029-7108449-215907.pdf.</E>
                         The Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 on April 22, 2020, and withdrew it on April 23, 2020.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88740 (April 24, 2020), 85 FR 24057 (“Notice”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 2</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange states that it proposes changes to Rule 967NY(a) to modify functionality and to adopt enhancements to the operation of the Trading Collars.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange applies Trade Collar Protection to incoming market orders and marketable limit orders (each a “collared order” and, collectively, “Marketable Orders”) if the width of the NBBO is greater than one Trading Collar. As described more fully in the Notice, the Exchange states that Trading Collars mitigate the risks associated with orders sweeping through multiple price points (including during extreme market volatility) and resulting in executions at prices that are potentially erroneous.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     According to the Exchange, by applying Trading Collars to incoming orders, the Exchange provides an opportunity to attract additional liquidity at tighter spreads and it “collars” affected orders at successive price points until the bid and offer are equal to the bid-ask differential guideline for that option (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     equal to the Trading Collar).
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Similarly, by applying Trading Collars to partially executed orders, the Exchange states that it prevents the balance of such orders from executing away from the prevailing market after exhausting interest at or near the top of book on arrival.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24058. “Trading Collars” are determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis and, unless announced otherwise via Trader Update, are the same value as the bid-ask differential guidelines established pursuant to Rule 925NY(b)(4). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 967NY(a)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24058.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to modify the treatment of incoming market orders when the width of the NBBO is greater than one Trading Collar (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     a “wide market”) and there is an existing contra-side collared order. Currently, an incoming market order would immediately execute against an existing contra-side collared order in a wide market.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange proposes to reject a market order to buy (sell) received in a wide market if there is already a collared Marketable Order to sell (buy).
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed rule change would prevent the execution of the market order at a potential erroneous price and provide the collared order greater opportunity to receive execution.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 967NY(a)(1)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 967NY(a)(1)(B).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange also proposes to amend the operation of the Trading Collar so that the display price would be the last execution price of the collared order.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Currently, the display price of a collared Marketable Order could be based on either the available contra-side trading interest within (or outside of) one Trading Collar or the Collar Range 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of the collared order.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed rule change would simplify the method of selecting the display price (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the current collar execution price) thereby enabling investors to gauge market interest, and, by using a single standard to determine 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35458"/>
                    the display price, provide more certainty for order senders.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 967NY(a)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         A “Collar Range” is within one Trading Collar above (for buy orders) or below (for sell orders) the collar execution price. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 967NY(a)(4)(D).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 967NY(a)(5)(A)-(B).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Currently, a collared order to buy (sell) would be assigned a new collar execution price one Trading Collar above (below) the current displayed price of the collared order and processed at the updated price after the expiration of one second and absent an update to the NBBO.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the current rule is silent as to the impact of any portion of the collared order routing to an away market as well as which side of the NBBO needs to update during the one- second time period.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to define an “Expiration” as when a collared order displays without executing, routing, or repricing and there is no update to the same-side NBBO price for a period of at least one second.
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed modification makes clear that any such routing or same-side NBBO updates would restart the one-second timer for repricing purposes, and that collared orders subject to conditions that qualify as a proposed Expiration would be repriced as set forth in Rule 967NY(a)(6)(C).
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Relatedly, the Exchange proposes to add a new paragraph that provides that a market order that is collared will cancel after it is subject to a specified number of Expirations, to be determined by the Exchange and announced by Trader Update.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 967NY(a)(6)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 967NY(a)(6)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 967NY(a)(6)(C)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Finally, the Exchange states that it will announce the implementation of the proposed rule change in a Trader Update to be published no later than 60 days following a Commission approval.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposal to reject incoming market orders when there is a contra-side collared order would allow the collared order to continue to seek liquidity while providing the latter-arriving, contra-side order protection from execution in a wide market, which could be indicative of unstable market conditions or market dislocation.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange also believes that rejecting the incoming market order rather than collaring it while there is a collared order on the contra-side would provide greater execution opportunities for the collared order.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24059.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal to select the display price of a collared order based on the current collar execution price would provide order senders with more certainty and enable them to gauge indications of market interest.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposed definition of “Expiration” and the proposal to limit the number of Expirations per collared market order would improve the operation of the Trading Collar functionality because canceling back market orders that have persisted for a certain number of Expirations, which could be indicative of unstable market conditions, should provide order senders more certainty of the handling of such orders and help avoid such orders receiving bad executions in times of market dislocation.
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                         at 24060.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Commission notes that the Exchange states that the proposed rule modifications to the Trading Collar functionality are similar to functionality available on other options exchanges.
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         Specifically, the Exchange compares the Trading Collar functionality, as proposed, with NASDAQ Options Market and NASDAQ OMX BX, Options 3, Section 15 (Risk Protections) (b)(1), Acceptable Trade Range. The Exchange states that these exchanges provide a risk protection feature for quotes and orders, which prevents executions (partial or otherwise) of orders beyond an “acceptable trade range” (as calculated by the exchange) and that when an order (or quote) reaches the limits of the “acceptable trade range”, it posts for a period not to exceed one second and recalculated a new “acceptable trade range”. 
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                         at 24060, n.22.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Commission believes that the operation of the Trade Collar Protection mechanism set forth in the proposal is consistent with the Act. In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed changes should provide more certainty for investors with respect to how their orders will be handled on the Exchange. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposal is reasonably designed to help prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.  </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Conclusion  </HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered,</E>
                     pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEAMER-2020-29), as modified by Amendment No. 2, be, and it hereby is, approved.  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>31</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                          
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>31</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                      
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,  </NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                  
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12520 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]  </FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89018; File No. SR-BOX-2019-19]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, To Adopt Rules Governing the Trading of Equity Securities on the Exchange Through a Facility of the Exchange Known as the Boston Security Token Exchange LLC</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    On September 27, 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to adopt rules governing the listing and trading of equity securities that would be NMS stocks on the Exchange through a facility of the Exchange known as the Boston Security 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35459"/>
                    Token Exchange LLC. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on October 18, 2019.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87287 (October 11, 2019), 84 FR 56022 (October 18, 2019) (“Original Notice”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On November 29, 2019, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On December 26, 2019, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which amended the proposed rule change as originally filed.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On January 16, 2020, the Commission published Amendment No. 1 for notice and comment and instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On February 19, 2020, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change, which replaced and superseded the proposed rule change as originally filed.
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission published the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on March 6, 2020.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On April 14, 2020, the Commission designated a longer period for Commission action on the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87641 (November 29, 2019), 84 FR 66701 (December 5, 2019). The Commission designated January 16, 2020 as the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove, the proposed rule change.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         When the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to BOX-2019-19, it also submitted the text of the partial amendment as a comment letter to the filing, which the Commission made publicly available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-19/srbox201919-6613675-202939.pdf</E>
                         (“Amendment No. 1”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88002 (January 16, 2020), 85 FR 4040 (January 23, 2020) (“Order Instituting Proceedings” or “OIP”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         In filing Amendment No. 2, the Exchange responded to questions raised in comment letters and the OIP. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Letter from Lisa Fall, President, BOX Exchange LLC, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated February 19, 2020, 
                        <E T="03">available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-19/srbox201919-6840937-208871.pdf</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88300 (February 28, 2020), 85 FR 13242 (March 6, 2020) (“Amendment No. 2”). Comments on the proposed rule change can be found at: 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-19/srbox201919.htm</E>
                        . The Exchange submitted responses to comment letters and OIP, which the Commission made publicly available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-19/srbox201919-7055631-215391.pdf</E>
                        ; 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-19/srbox201919-7117370-216029.pdf</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88634 (April 14, 2020), 85 FR 21906 (April 20, 2020). The Commission designated June 14, 2020 as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>On May 12, 2020, the Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-BOX-2019-19).</P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>11</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>11</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12523 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89008; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-31]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, To Modify Rule 6.60-O Regarding the Treatment of Orders Subject to Trade Collar Protection</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 9, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to modify Exchange Rule 6.60-O regarding the treatment of orders subject to Trade Collar Protection. The Exchange submitted Amendment No. 2, which superseded and replaced the proposed rule change, on April 23, 2020.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on April 30, 2020.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78a.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         Amendment No. 2 is available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2020-31/srnysearca202031-7238141-217098.pdf.</E>
                         The Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 on April 22, 2020, and withdrew it on April 23, 2020.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88737 (April 24, 2020), 85 FR 24069 (“Notice”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 2</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange states that it proposes changes to Rule 6.60-O(a) to modify functionality and to adopt enhancements to the operation of the Trading Collars.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange applies Trade Collar Protection to incoming market orders and marketable limit orders (each a “collared order” and, collectively, “Marketable Orders”) if the width of the NBBO is greater than one Trading Collar. As described more fully in the Notice, the Exchange states that Trading Collars mitigate the risks associated with orders sweeping through multiple price points (including during extreme market volatility) and resulting in executions at prices that are potentially erroneous.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     According to the Exchange, by applying Trading Collars to incoming orders, the Exchange provides an opportunity to attract additional liquidity at tighter spreads and it “collars” affected orders at successive price points until the bid and offer are equal to the bid-ask differential guideline for that option (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     equal to the Trading Collar).
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Similarly, by applying Trading Collars to partially executed orders, the Exchange states that it prevents the balance of such orders from executing away from the prevailing market after exhausting interest at or near the top of book on arrival.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24070. “Trading Collars” are determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis and, unless announced otherwise via Trader Update, are the same value as the bid-ask differential guidelines established pursuant to Rule 6.37-O(b)(4). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 6.60(a)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24070.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to modify the treatment of incoming market orders when the width of the NBBO is greater than one Trading Collar (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     a “wide market”) and there is an existing contra-side collared order. Currently, an incoming market order would immediately execute against an existing contra-side collared order in a wide market.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange proposes to reject a market order to buy (sell) received in a wide market if there is already a collared Marketable Order to sell (buy).
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed rule change would prevent the execution of the market order at a potential erroneous price and provide the collared order greater opportunity to receive execution.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 6.60-O(a)(1)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 6.60-O(a)(1)(B).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24070.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange also proposes to amend the operation of the Trading Collar so 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35460"/>
                    that the display price would be the last execution price of the collared order.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Currently, the display price of a collared Marketable Order could be based on either the available contra-side trading interest within (or outside of) one Trading Collar or the Collar Range 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     of the collared order.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed rule change would simplify the method of selecting the display price (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the current collar execution price) thereby enabling investors to gauge market interest, and, by using a single standard to determine the display price, provide more certainty for order senders.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 6.60-O(a)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         A “Collar Range” is within one Trading Collar above (for buy orders) or below (for sell orders) the collar execution price. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 6.60-O(a)(4)(D).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 6.60-O(a)(5)(A)-(B).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24071.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Currently, a collared order to buy (sell) would be assigned a new collar execution price one Trading Collar above (below) the current displayed price of the collared order and processed at the updated price after the expiration of one second and absent an update to the NBBO.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the current rule is silent as to the impact of any portion of the collared order routing to an away market as well as which side of the NBBO needs to update during the one- second time period.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to define an “Expiration” as when a collared order displays without executing, routing, or repricing and there is no update to the same-side NBBO price for a period of at least one second.
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange states that the proposed modification makes clear that any such routing or same-side NBBO updates would restart the one-second timer for repricing purposes, and that collared orders subject to conditions that qualify as a proposed Expiration would be repriced as set forth in Rule 6.60-O(a)(6)(C).
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Relatedly, the Exchange proposes to add a new paragraph that provides that a market order that is collared will cancel after it is subject to a specified number of Expirations, to be determined by the Exchange and announced by Trader Update.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Rule 6.60-O(a)(6)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 6.60-O(a)(6)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24071.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 6.60-O(a)(6)(C)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Finally, the Exchange states that it will announce the implementation of the proposed rule change in a Trader Update to be published no later than 60 days following a Commission approval.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24071.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposal to reject incoming market orders when there is a contra-side collared order would allow the collared order to continue to seek liquidity while providing the latter-arriving, contra-side order protection from execution in a wide market, which could be indicative of unstable market conditions or market dislocation.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange also believes that rejecting the incoming market order rather than collaring it while there is a collared order on the contra-side would provide greater execution opportunities for the collared order.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 5, 85 FR at 24071.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal to select the display price of a collared order based on the current collar execution price would provide order senders with more certainty and enable them to gauge indications of market interest.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposed definition of “Expiration” and the proposal to limit the number of Expirations per collared market order would improve the operation of the Trading Collar functionality because canceling back market orders that have persisted for a certain number of Expirations, which could be indicative of unstable market conditions, should provide order senders more certainty of the handling of such orders and help avoid such orders receiving bad executions in times of market dislocation.
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Commission notes that the Exchange states that the proposed rule modifications to the Trading Collar functionality are similar to functionality available on other options exchanges.
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         Specifically, the Exchange compares the Trading Collar functionality, as proposed, with NASDAQ Options Market and NASDAQ OMX BX, Options 3, Section 15 (Risk Protections) (b)(1), Acceptable Trade Range. The Exchange states that these exchanges provide a risk protection feature for quotes and orders, which prevents executions (partial or otherwise) of orders beyond an “acceptable trade range” (as calculated by the exchange) and that when an order (or quote) reaches the limits of the “acceptable trade range”, it posts for a period not to exceed one second and recalculated a new “acceptable trade range”. 
                        <E T="03">See id.</E>
                         85 FR at 24072.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Commission believes that the operation of the Trade Collar Protection mechanism set forth in the proposal is consistent with the Act. In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed changes should provide more certainty for investors with respect to how their orders will be handled on the Exchange. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposal is reasonably designed to help prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Conclusion</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered</E>
                    , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2020-31), as modified by Amendment No. 2, be, and it hereby is, approved.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>31</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>31</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12515 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35461"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89019; File No. SR-CboeEDGA-2020-016]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rule 14.13 To Permit the Trading, Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     notice is hereby given that on June 3, 2020, Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “EDGA”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGA”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.</P>
                <P>
                    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
                    <E T="03">http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/edga/</E>
                    ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Purpose</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”), of Tracking Fund Shares,
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which substantially conforms to Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”) Rule 14.11(m).
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to Rule 14.1(a) to reference Tracking Fund Shares and proposed Rule 14.13, where applicable. The Exchange also proposes to correct a typographical error in Exchange Rule 14.1.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         The term “Tracking Fund Share” means a security that: (i) Represents an interest in an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company”) organized as an open-end management investment company, that invests in a portfolio of securities selected by the Investment Company's investment adviser consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives and policies; (ii) is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in return for a deposit of a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; (iii) when aggregated in the same specified minimum number, may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; and (iv) the portfolio holdings for which are disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 88887 (May 15, 2020) 85 FR 30990 (May 21, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2019-107) (the “BZX Approval Order”). The BZX proposal resulting in the BZX Approval Order involved several applications for exemptive relief that were filed with the Commission and for which public notice was issued on November 14, 2019 and a subsequent order granting certain exemptive relief to, among others, Fidelity Management &amp; Research Company and FMR Co., Inc., Fidelity Beach Street Trust, and Fidelity Distributors Corporation (File No. 812-14364), issued on December 10, 2019 (the “Application,” “Notice,” and “Order,” respectively, and, collectively, the “Exemptive Order”). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33683 (November 14, 2019), 84 FR 64140 (November 20, 2019) (the Notice) and 33712 (the Order). The Order specifically notes that “granting the requested exemptions is appropriate in and consistent with the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. It is further found that the terms of the proposed transactions, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and that the proposed transactions are consistent with the policy of each registered investment company concerned and with the general purposes of the Act.” The Exchange notes that it also referred to the application for exemptive relief orders (collectively, with the Application, the “Proxy Applications”) and notices thereof (collectively, with the Notice, the “Proxy Notices”) for T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Equity Series, Inc. (File No. 812-14214 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33685 and 33713), Natixis ETF Trust II, et al. (File No. 812-14870 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33684 and 33711), Blue Tractor ETF Trust and Blue Tractor Group, LLC (File No. 812-14625 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33682 and 33710), and Gabelli ETFs Trust, et al. (File No. 812-15036 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33681 and 33708). While there are certain differences between the applications, the Exchange believes that each would qualify as Tracking Fund Shares under BZX Rule 14.11(m).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange does not currently list any securities as a primary listing market.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with this fact, Exchange Rule 14.1(a) currently states that all securities traded on the Exchange are traded pursuant to UTP and that the Exchange will not list any securities before first filing and obtaining Commission approval of rules that incorporate qualitative listing criteria and comply with Rules 10A-3 
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10A-3”) and 10C-1 
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10C-1”) under the Act. Therefore, the provisions of existing Rules 14.2 through 14.9, 14.11 through 14.12, and proposed Rule 14.13 that permit the listing of certain Equity Securities 
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     will not be effective until the Exchange files a proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(2) under the Act to amend its rules to comply with Rule 10A-3 and 10C-1 under the Exchange Act and to incorporate qualitative listing criteria, and such proposed rule change is approved by the Commission. 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35462"/>
                    Considering the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 as set forth below.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that it does not currently list any securities nor does it intend to list any securities in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, plans to submit in the near future a proposal to amend its applicable Rules set forth in Chapter XIV in order to reflect this fact.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         Rule 10A-3 obligates the Exchange to prohibit the initial or continued listing of any security of an issuer that is not in compliance with certain required standards. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10A-3.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         Rule 10C-1 obligates the Exchange to establish listing standards that require each member of a listed issuer's compensation committee to be a member of the issuer's board and to be independent, as well as establish certain factors that an issuer must consider when evaluating the independence of a director. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10C-1.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         As provided in Rule 14.1(a), the term “Equity Security” means, but is not limited to, common stock, secondary classes of common stock, preferred stock and similar issues, shares or certificates of beneficial interest of trusts, notes, limited partnership interests, warrants, certificates of deposit for common stock, convertible debt securities, ADRs, CVRs, Investment Company Units, Trust Issued Receipts (including those based on Investment Shares), Commodity-Based Trust Shares, Currency Trust Shares, Partnership Units, Equity-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities, Currency-Linked Securities, Portfolio Depositary Receipts, Equity-Linked Debt Securities, Managed Portfolio Shares, and Exchange-Traded Funds. Further, the Exchange now proposes to include the term “Tracking Fund Shares” to the definition of Equity Security.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Proposed Listing Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    Proposed Rule 14.13 is substantially similar to BZX Rule 14.11(m) with the exception that BZX Rules provide for the delisting of securities,
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while the Exchange only trades securities pursuant to UTP.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the proposed Rule 
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     provides that the Exchange will consider the termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under certain circumstances,
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while no such provision is provided in BZX Rule 14.11(m). Nonetheless, the Exchange believes the proposal will not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest and will not impose any significant burden on competition as it is substantially similar to Exchange Rules applicable to other product types which allow for the termination of UTP in those products.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As such, the Exchange believes the proposal raises no novel issues.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         BZX Rule 14.11(m)(4)(B)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rules 14.13(d)(2)(C)(i) through 14.13(d)(2)(C)(vi).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Exchange Rules 14.3(g)(2), 14.11(d)(2)(B), and 14.12(d)(2)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Policy Discussion</HD>
                <P>
                    The purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of Exchange-Traded Funds (“ETFs”) 
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Investment Company Units.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         For purposes of this filing, the term ETF will include only Portfolio Depositary Receipts as defined in Rule 14.8, Investment Company Units as defined in Rule 14.2, and Exchange-Traded Fund Shares as defined in Rule 14.12, along with the equivalent products defined in the rules of other national securities exchanges.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that there is one additional substantive difference between proposed Rule 14.13 and Rule 14.2: Proposed Rule 14.13 would require a rule filing under Section 19(b) prior to listing any product on the Exchange meaning that no series of Tracking Fund Shares could be listed on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) and there are no proposed rules comparable to the quantitative portfolio holdings standards from Rule 14.2.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) will, however, require each series of Tracking Fund Shares to at a minimum disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in accordance with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                        <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, authorized participants, arbitrageurs, and other market participants (collectively, “Market Makers”) need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the Fund Portfolio. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         As provided in the Proxy Notices, funds and their respective advisers will take remedial actions as necessary if the funds do not function as anticipated. For the first three years after a launch, a fund will establish certain thresholds for its level of tracking error, premiums/discounts, and spreads, so that, upon the fund's crossing a threshold, the adviser will promptly call a meeting of the fund's board of directors and will present the board or committee with recommendations for appropriate remedial measures. The board would then consider the continuing viability of the fund, whether shareholders are being harmed, and what, if any, action would be appropriate. Specifically, the Proxy Applications and Proxy Notices provide that such a meeting would occur: (1) If the tracking error exceeds 1%; or (2) if, for 30 or more days in any quarter or 15 days in a row (a) the absolute difference between either the market closing price or bid/ask price, on one hand, and NAV, on the other, exceeds 2%, or (b) the bid/ask spread exceeds 2%.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         Tracking Fund Shares will be purchased or redeemed only in large aggregations, or “creation units,” and the Tracking Basket will constitute the names and quantities of instruments for both purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.</P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35463"/>
                    will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice at 64144. The Commission also notes that as long as arbitrage continues to keep the Fund's secondary market price and NAV close, and does so efficiently so that spreads remain narrow, that investors would benefit from the opportunity to invest in active strategies through a vehicle that offers the traditional benefits of ETFs. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Id., at 64145.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each fund and its Fund Portfolio will be publicly available at all times. Each series will disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website will also disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each fund as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended. The website and information will be publicly available at no charge.</P>
                <P>While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(d)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Surveillance</HD>
                <P>The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.</P>
                <P>As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily Fund Portfolio of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Halts</HD>
                <P>As described above, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D) provides that (i) the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present; and (ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Availability of Information</HD>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares will be 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35464"/>
                    continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) high-speed line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate trading in Tracking Fund Shares during all trading sessions.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         With respect to trading in Tracking Fund Shares, all of the EDGA Member obligations relating to product description and prospectus delivery requirements will continue to apply in accordance with Exchange rules and federal securities laws, and the Exchange will continue to monitor its Members for compliance with such requirements.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange also proposes to correct a typographical error by removing a duplicate (a) in Exchange Rule 14.1.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Statutory Basis</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 14.13 is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the proposed rules relating to listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares provide specific initial and continued listing criteria required to be met by such securities. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(1) provides the initial listing criteria for a series of Tracking Fund Shares, which include the following: (i) For each series, the Exchange will establish a minimum number of Tracking Fund Shares required to be outstanding at the time of commencement of trading on the Exchange; (ii) the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares that the NAV per share for the series will be calculated daily and that each of the following will be made available to all market participants at the same time when disclosed: The NAV, the Tracking Basket, and the Fund Portfolio; and (iii) all Tracking Fund Shares will have a stated investment objective which shall be adhered to under Normal Market Conditions.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(4).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2) provides that each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be listed and traded (including trading pursuant to UTP) on the Exchange subject to application of the following continued listing criteria: (i) The Tracking Basket will be disseminated at least once daily and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (ii) the Fund Portfolio will at a minimum be publicly disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) upon termination of an Investment Company, the Exchange requires that Tracking Fund Shares issued in connection with such entity be removed from listing on the Exchange; and (iv) voting rights shall be as set forth in the applicable Investment Company prospectus or Statement of Additional Information.</P>
                <P>Additionally, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) provides that the Exchange will consider the suspension of trading in or removal from listing of or termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under any of the following circumstances: (i) If, following the initial twelve-month period after commencement of trading on the Exchange of a series of Tracking Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50 beneficial holders of the series of Tracking Fund Shares for 30 or more consecutive trading days; (ii) if either the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio is not made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) if the Investment Company issuing the Tracking Fund Shares has failed to file any filings required by the Commission or if the Exchange is aware that the Investment Company is not in compliance with the conditions of any exemptive order or no-action relief granted by the Commission to the Investment Company with respect to the series of Tracking Fund Shares; (iv) if any of the requirements set forth in this rule are not continuously maintained; (v) if any of the applicable Continued Listing Representations for the issue of Tracking Fund Shares are not continuously met; or (vi) if such other event shall occur or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable.</P>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(i) provides that the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: (i) The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or (ii) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <P>
                    While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(b)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35465"/>
                    procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.
                </P>
                <P>The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about Tracking Fund Shares (the Tracking Basket) as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to firewalls and information protection will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to the securities included in or changes made to the Fund Portfolio and/or the Tracking Basket.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, the purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of ETFs while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Managed Fund Shares.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, Market Makers need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the holdings of a series of Tracking Fund Shares.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the fund's portfolio holdings. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 13.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 14.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.</P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 15.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each series of Tracking Fund Shares and its Fund Portfolio will be required to be made publicly available at all times. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum be required to publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each Fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will also be required disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each series of Tracking Fund Shares as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended.</P>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35466"/>
                    trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
                </P>
                <P>As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily portfolio holdings of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares of each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be available via the CTA high-speed line. The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in such shares to be subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01.</P>
                <P>For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition</HD>
                <P>The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. Rather, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the trading pursuant to UTP of a new type of actively-managed exchange-traded product, thus enhancing competition among both market participants and listing venues, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others</HD>
                <P>The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action</HD>
                <P>
                    Because the 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 
                    <SU>31</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>32</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>31</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>32</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 
                    <SU>33</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
                    <SU>34</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative upon filing. The Exchange states that a waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would allow for the immediate trading, pursuant to UTP, of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange and therefore would provide investors with an additional trading venue option. In addition, the proposal would correct a typographical error in the existing rule text. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.
                    <SU>35</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>33</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>34</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>35</SU>
                         For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    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:
                    <PRTPAGE P="35467"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ); or
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number</E>
                     SR-CboeEDGA-2020-016 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper comments</HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.</P>
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGA-2020-016. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGA-2020-016 and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.
                </FP>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>36</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>36</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12524 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89012; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2020-017]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rule 14.13 To Permit the Trading, Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     notice is hereby given that on June 3, 2020, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “BYX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>The Exchange proposes a rule change to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to Rule 14.1(a) to reference Tracking Fund Shares and proposed Rule 14.13, where applicable. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.</P>
                <P>
                    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
                    <E T="03">http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/byx/</E>
                    ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Purpose</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”), of Tracking Fund Shares,
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which substantially conforms to Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”) Rule 14.11(m).
                    <FTREF/>
                    <SU>6</SU>
                      
                    <PRTPAGE P="35468"/>
                    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to Rule 14.1(a) to reference Tracking Fund Shares and proposed Rule 14.13, where applicable.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         The term “Tracking Fund Share” means a security that: (i) Represents an interest in an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company”) organized as an open-end management investment company, that invests in a portfolio of securities selected by the Investment Company's investment adviser consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives and policies; (ii) is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in return for a deposit of a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; (iii) when aggregated in the same specified minimum number, may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; and (iv) the portfolio holdings for which are disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 88887 (May 15, 2020) 85 FR 30990 (May 21, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2019-107) (the “BZX Approval Order”). The BZX proposal resulting in the BZX Approval Order involved several applications for exemptive relief that were filed with the Commission and for which public notice was issued on November 14, 2019 and a subsequent order granting certain exemptive relief to, among others, Fidelity Management &amp; Research Company and FMR Co., Inc., Fidelity Beach Street Trust, and Fidelity Distributors Corporation (File No. 812-14364), issued on December 10, 2019 (the “Application,” “Notice,” and “Order,” respectively, and, collectively, the “Exemptive Order”). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33683 (November 14, 2019), 84 FR 64140 (November 20, 2019) (the Notice) and 33712 (the Order). The Order specifically notes that “granting the requested exemptions is appropriate in and consistent with the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. It is further found that the terms of the proposed transactions, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and that the proposed transactions are consistent with the policy of each registered investment company concerned and with the general purposes of the Act.” The Exchange notes that it also referred to the application for exemptive relief orders (collectively, with the Application, the “Proxy Applications”) and notices thereof (collectively, with the Notice, the “Proxy Notices”) for T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Equity Series, Inc. (File No. 812-14214 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33685 and 33713), Natixis ETF Trust II, et al. (File No. 812-
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        14870 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33684 and 33711), Blue Tractor ETF Trust and Blue Tractor Group, LLC (File No. 812-14625 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33682 and 33710), and Gabelli ETFs Trust, et al. (File No. 812-15036 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33681 and 33708). While there are certain differences between the applications, the Exchange believes that each would qualify as Tracking Fund Shares under BZX Rule 14.11(m).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange does not currently list any securities as a primary listing market.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with this fact, Exchange Rule 14.1(a) currently states that all securities traded on the Exchange are traded pursuant to UTP and that the Exchange will not list any securities before first filing and obtaining Commission approval of rules that incorporate qualitative listing criteria and comply with Rules 10A-3 
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10A-3”) and 10C-1 
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10C-1”) under the Act. Therefore, the provisions of existing Rules 14.2 through 14.9, 14.11 through 14.12, and proposed Rule 14.13 that permit the listing of certain Equity Securities 
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     will not be effective until the Exchange files a proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(2) under the Act to amend its rules to comply with Rule 10A-3 and 10C-1 under the Exchange Act and to incorporate qualitative listing criteria, and such proposed rule change is approved by the Commission. Considering the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 as set forth below.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that it does not currently list any securities nor does it intend to list any securities in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, plans to submit in the near future a proposal to amend its applicable Rules set forth in Chapter XIV in order to reflect this fact.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         Rule 10A-3 obligates the Exchange to prohibit the initial or continued listing of any security of an issuer that is not in compliance with certain required standards. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10A-3.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         Rule 10C-1 obligates the Exchange to establish listing standards that require each member of a listed issuer's compensation committee to be a member of the issuer's board and to be independent, as well as establish certain factors that an issuer must consider when evaluating the independence of a director. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10C-1.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         As provided in Rule 14.1(a), the term “Equity Security” means, but is not limited to, common stock, secondary classes of common stock, preferred stock and similar issues, shares or certificates of beneficial interest of trusts, notes, limited partnership interests, warrants, certificates of deposit for common stock, convertible debt securities, ADRs, CVRs, Investment Company Units, Trust Issued Receipts (including those based on Investment Shares), Commodity-Based Trust Shares, Currency Trust Shares, Partnership Units, Equity-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities, Currency-Linked Securities, Portfolio Depositary Receipts, Equity-Linked Debt Securities, Managed Portfolio Shares, and Exchange-Traded Funds. Further, the Exchange now proposes to include the term “Tracking Fund Shares” to the definition of Equity Security.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Proposed Listing Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    Proposed Rule 14.13 is substantially similar to BZX Rule 14.11(m) with the exception that BZX Rules provide for the delisting of securities,
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while the Exchange only trades securities pursuant to UTP.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the proposed Rule 
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     provides that the Exchange will consider the termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under certain circumstances,
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while no such provision is provided in BZX Rule 14.11(m). Nonetheless, the Exchange believes the proposal will not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest and will not impose any significant burden on competition as it is substantially similar to Exchange Rules applicable to other product types which allow for the termination of UTP in those products.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As such, the Exchange believes the proposal raises no novel issues.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         BZX Rule 14.11(m)(4)(B)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rules 14.13(d)(2)(C)(i) through 14.13(d)(2)(C)(vi).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Exchange Rules 14.3(g)(2), 14.11(d)(2)(B), and 14.12(d)(2)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Policy Discussion</HD>
                <P>
                    The purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of Exchange-Traded Funds (“ETFs”) 
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Investment Company Units.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         For purposes of this filing, the term ETF will include only Portfolio Depositary Receipts as defined in Rule 14.8, Investment Company Units as defined in Rule 14.2, and Exchange-Traded Fund Shares as defined in Rule 14.12, along with the equivalent products defined in the rules of other national securities exchanges.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that there is one additional substantive difference between proposed Rule 14.13 and Rule 14.2: Proposed Rule 14.13 would require a rule filing under Section 19(b) prior to listing any product on the Exchange meaning that no series of Tracking Fund Shares could be listed on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) and there are no proposed rules comparable to the quantitative portfolio holdings standards from Rule 14.2.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) will, however, require each series of Tracking Fund Shares to at a minimum disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in accordance with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                        <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, authorized participants, arbitrageurs, and other market participants (collectively, “Market Makers”) need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35469"/>
                    redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the Fund Portfolio. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         As provided in the Proxy Notices, funds and their respective advisers will take remedial actions as necessary if the funds do not function as anticipated. For the first three years after a launch, a fund will establish certain thresholds for its level of tracking error, premiums/discounts, and spreads, so that, upon the fund's crossing a threshold, the adviser will promptly call a meeting of the fund's board of directors and will present the board or committee with recommendations for appropriate remedial measures. The board would then consider the continuing viability of the fund, whether shareholders are being harmed, and what, if any, action would be appropriate. Specifically, the Proxy Applications and Proxy Notices provide that such a meeting would occur: (1) If the tracking error exceeds 1%; or (2) if, for 30 or more days in any quarter or 15 days in a row (a) the absolute difference between either the market closing price or bid/ask price, on one hand, and NAV, on the other, exceeds 2%, or (b) the bid/ask spread exceeds 2%.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         Tracking Fund Shares will be purchased or redeemed only in large aggregations, or “creation units,” and the Tracking Basket will constitute the names and quantities of instruments for both purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.</P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice at 64144. The Commission also notes that as long as arbitrage continues to keep the Fund's secondary market price and NAV close, and does so efficiently so that spreads remain narrow, that investors would benefit from the opportunity to invest in active strategies through a vehicle that offers the traditional benefits of ETFs. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Id., at 64145.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each fund and its Fund Portfolio will be publicly available at all times. Each series will disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website will also disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each fund as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended. The website and information will be publicly available at no charge.</P>
                <P>While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(d)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Surveillance</HD>
                <P>The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily Fund Portfolio of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35470"/>
                    information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Halts</HD>
                <P>As described above, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D) provides that (i) the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present; and (ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Availability of Information</HD>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) high-speed line.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate trading in Tracking Fund Shares during all trading sessions.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         With respect to trading in Tracking Fund Shares, all of the BYX Member obligations relating to product description and prospectus delivery requirements will continue to apply in accordance with Exchange rules and federal securities laws, and the Exchange will continue to monitor its Members for compliance with such requirements.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Statutory Basis</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 14.13 is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the proposed rules relating to listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares provide specific initial and continued listing criteria required to be met by such securities. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(1) provides the initial listing criteria for a series of Tracking Fund Shares, which include the following: (i) For each series, the Exchange will establish a minimum number of Tracking Fund Shares required to be outstanding at the time of commencement of trading on the Exchange; (ii) the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares that the NAV per share for the series will be calculated daily and that each of the following will be made available to all market participants at the same time when disclosed: The NAV, the Tracking Basket, and the Fund Portfolio; and (iii) all Tracking Fund Shares will have a stated investment objective which shall be adhered to under Normal Market Conditions.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(4).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2) provides that each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be listed and traded (including trading pursuant to UTP) on the Exchange subject to application of the following continued listing criteria: (i) The Tracking Basket will be disseminated at least once daily and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (ii) the Fund Portfolio will at a minimum be publicly disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) upon termination of an Investment Company, the Exchange requires that Tracking Fund Shares issued in connection with such entity be removed from listing on the Exchange; and (iv) voting rights shall be as set forth in the applicable Investment Company prospectus or Statement of Additional Information.</P>
                <P>
                    Additionally, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) provides that the Exchange will consider the suspension of trading in or removal from listing of or termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under any of the following circumstances: (i) If, following the initial twelve-month period after commencement of trading on the Exchange of a series of Tracking Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50 beneficial holders of the series of Tracking Fund Shares for 30 or more consecutive trading days; (ii) if either the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio is not made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) if the Investment Company issuing the Tracking Fund Shares has failed to file any filings required by the Commission or if the Exchange is aware that the Investment Company is not in compliance with the conditions of any exemptive order or no-action relief granted by the Commission to the Investment Company with respect to the series of Tracking Fund Shares; (iv) if any of the requirements set forth in this rule are not continuously maintained; (v) if any of the applicable Continued Listing Representations for the issue of Tracking Fund Shares are not continuously met; or (vi) if such other event shall occur or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35471"/>
                    makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable.
                </P>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(i) provides that the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: (i) The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or (ii) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <P>While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(b)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.</P>
                <P>The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about Tracking Fund Shares (the Tracking Basket) as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to firewalls and information protection will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to the securities included in or changes made to the Fund Portfolio and/or the Tracking Basket.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, the purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of ETFs while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Managed Fund Shares.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, Market Makers need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the holdings of a series of Tracking Fund Shares.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the fund's portfolio holdings. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 13.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 14.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35472"/>
                    arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.
                </P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 15.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each series of Tracking Fund Shares and its Fund Portfolio will be required to be made publicly available at all times. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum be required to publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each Fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will also be required disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each series of Tracking Fund Shares as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended.</P>
                <P>The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.</P>
                <P>As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily portfolio holdings of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares of each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be available via the CTA high-speed line. The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in such shares to be subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01.</P>
                <P>For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition</HD>
                <P>The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. Rather, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the trading pursuant to UTP of a new type of actively-managed exchange-traded product, thus enhancing competition among both market participants and listing venues, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others</HD>
                <P>The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action</HD>
                <P>
                    Because the 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 
                    <SU>31</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>32</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>31</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>32</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to 
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <PRTPAGE P="35473"/>
                <P>
                    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 
                    <SU>33</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
                    <SU>34</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative upon filing. The Exchange states that a waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would allow for the immediate trading, pursuant to UTP, of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange and therefore would provide investors with an additional trading venue option. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.
                    <SU>35</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>33</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>34</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>35</SU>
                         For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments</HD>
                <P>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:</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml);</E>
                     or
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov.</E>
                     Please include File Number SR-CboeBYX-2020-017 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper Comments</HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.</P>
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2020-017. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2020-017 and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.
                </FP>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>36</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>36</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12518 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89017; File No. SR-BOX-2019-37]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change in Connection With the Proposed Commencement of Operations of Boston Security Token Exchange LLC as a Facility of the Exchange</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    On December 18, 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change in connection with the proposed commencement of operations of Boston Security Token Exchange LLC (“BSTX”) as a facility of the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on January 3, 2020.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87868 (December 30, 2019), 85 FR 345 (January 3, 2020) (“Notice”). Comments on the proposed rule change can be found at: 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-box-2019-37/srbox201937.htm.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    On February 13, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On April 1, 2020, the Commission instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88206 (February 13, 2020), 85 FR 9824 (February 20, 2020). The Commission designated April 2, 2020 as the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88536 (April 1, 2020), 85 FR 19537 (April 7, 2020) (“Order Instituting Proceedings” or “OIP”).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>On May 12, 2020, the Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-BOX-2019-37).</P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>7</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>7</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE> Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12522 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <PRTPAGE P="35474"/>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89004; File No. SR-OCC-2020-802]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice Related to Proposed Changes to The Options Clearing Corporation's Framework for Liquidity Risk Management</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On April 6, 2020, the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-OCC-2020-802 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, entitled Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Clearing Supervision Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     to adopt a written framework establishing OCC's approach to managing liquidity risk.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Advance Notice was published for public comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on May 8, 2020,
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and the Commission has received no comments regarding the changes proposed in the Advance Notice.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission is hereby providing notice of no objection to the Advance Notice.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78a 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing 
                        <E T="03">infra</E>
                         note 5, at 85 FR 27470.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88792 (May 1, 2020), 85 FR 27470 (May 8, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-802) (“Notice of Filing”). On April 6, 2020, OCC also filed a related proposed rule change (File No. SR-OCC-2020-003) with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder (“Proposed Rule Change”). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4, respectively. In the Proposed Rule Change, which was published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on April 24, 2020, OCC seeks approval of proposed changes to its rules necessary to implement the Advance Notice. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88690 (Apr. 20, 2020), 85 FR 23095 (Apr. 24, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-003). The comment period for the related Proposed Rule Change filing closed on May 15, 2020.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         Since the proposal contained in the Advance Notice was also filed as a proposed rule change, all public comments received on the proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are submitted on the Proposed Rule Change or the Advance Notice.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">
                    II. Background 
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </HD>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings specified in OCC's Rules and By-Laws, available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>As noted above, OCC proposes to adopt a written framework establishing OCC's approach to managing liquidity risk. This written framework, the Liquidity Risk Management Framework (“LRMF”), sets forth a comprehensive overview of OCC's liquidity risk management practices and governs OCC's policies and procedures as they relate to liquidity risk management. In connection with implementing the proposed LRMF, OCC proposes to make revisions to its current rules regarding how OCC (1) maintains sufficient liquidity resources to meet its settlement obligations; (2) addresses foreseeable liquidity shortfalls not covered by OCC's liquidity resources; (3) replenishes any of OCC's resources employed during a stress event; (4) undertakes due diligence of OCC's liquidity providers; and (5) requires each Clearing Member to have procedures to ensure operational capacity to meet its obligations arising from participation in OCC. OCC proposes to make conforming changes throughout its rules to effect the substance of the changes described below. Such changes would be made to OCC's Clearing Fund and Stress Testing Methodology (“Methodology Description”), Risk Management Framework Policy, Clearing Fund Methodology Policy, Collateral Risk Management Policy, Counterparty Credit Risk Management Policy (“CCRM Policy”), and Default Management Policy.</P>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF describes the primary liquidity risks OCC faces when managing a Clearing Member default. To determine the amount of resources it needs, OCC assumes a two-day period of risk (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the period between a Clearing Member default and the settlement of the defaulted Clearing Member's obligations). According to OCC, the potential liquidity obligations arising from a Clearing Member default may include mark-to-market obligations on futures and stock loan positions, trade premiums, cash-settled exercise and assignment (“E&amp;A”) activity, auction payments, settlements resulting from the E&amp;A of physically-settled options, and funding of OCC's liquidation agents.
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Such obligations would represent the specific liquidity risks that OCC would monitor, size, and manage as described in the LRMF. OCC would consider such potential obligations when determining its liquidity resources needs.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 27471.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF also describes factors that OCC would not consider when determining its liquidity resources needs. Such factors include margin deficits and other payments associated with a liquidation (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     brokerage, bank, and legal fees), which OCC states do not generally create immediate liquidity demands that could impede settlement. OCC also does not consider the costs it would directly bear to hedge open positions in its liquidity resource determinations because OCC's primary goal is to liquidate positions prior to the need for hedging. Additionally, the proposed LRMF identifies liquidity risks that OCC would mitigate through tools other than the application of liquidity resources. Such risks include the operational failure or disruption of OCC's liquidity providers, custodian, or settlement bank as well as potential concentration risks from key settlement banks and liquidity providers.
                </P>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF identifies and defines the four categories of liquidity resources that OCC would maintain: (1) “Base Liquidity Resources,” (2) “Available Liquidity Resources,” (3) “Required Liquidity Resources,” and (4) “Other Liquidity Resources.” The proposed LRMF defines Base Liquidity Resources as assets that are readily available and convertible into cash through prearranged funding arrangements 
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and required Clearing Fund cash on deposit.
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed LRMF defines Available Liquidity Resources as OCC's Base Liquidity Resources plus Clearing Fund cash deposits in excess of the minimum required amount.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The proposed LRMF defines OCC's Required Liquidity Resources, which are comprised of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources plus any amount of cash margin deposits of a Clearing Member Group required under the Contingency Funding Plan (described below). Finally, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's Other Liquidity Resources, which may or may not be available to OCC in a default situation (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     non-cash margin deposits of the defaulting Clearing Member, including letters of credit, Government Securities, and Government Sponsored Entity securities 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35475"/>
                    that may be liquidated for same-day or next day settlement).
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         OCC endeavors to maintain committed liquidity facilities with both bank and non-bank counterparties. OCC maintains a committed credit facility syndicated among various commercial banks. OCC also attempts to maintain committed repurchase agreements, which may be with either bank or non-bank counterparties.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         OCC's rules require Clearing Members to collectively contribute $3 billion in U.S. dollar cash to the Clearing Fund.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         OCC would only include excess cash deposits up to the amount the required Clearing Fund size exceeds the minimum Clearing Fund size as determined by OCC Rule 1001(b). Further, cash deposits in excess of a Clearing Member's total Clearing Fund requirement would not be included.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Sufficiency of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>The proposed changes include rules designed to ensure the sufficiency of OCC's liquidity resources. Such rules address the maintenance of liquidity resources designed to address a variety of stress scenarios through the sizing of such resources and the management of certain Clearing Member cash collateral withdrawals. The proposal also describes OCC's approach to liquidity stress testing more generally, including OCC's internal reporting processes related to liquidity stress testing.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Maintenance of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    To ensure that OCC identifies the appropriate amount of liquidity resources it should maintain, OCC's proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall approach to liquidity stress testing and liquidity resource sizing. OCC's approach for liquidity stress testing would rely on the stressed scenarios and prices generated under OCC's current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803). OCC's current methodology considers a range of stress scenarios and possible price changes in liquidation periods, including but not limited to: (1) Relevant peak historic price volatilities; (2) shifts in other market factors including, as appropriate, price determinants and yield curves; (3) the default of one or multiple members; (4) forward-looking stress scenarios; and (5) reverse stress tests aimed at identifying extreme default scenarios and extreme market conditions for which the OCC's resources would be insufficient. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 27473.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Under the proposal, OCC's Board of Directors (“Board”) would, at least annually, determine the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources based on a recommendation from the Risk Committee of OCC's Board (“RC”). The RC's recommendation would be based on an internal analysis summarizing OCC's projected liquidity demands under a variety of stress scenarios, including the sufficiency of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources against extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis, and certain scenarios used to size OCC's Clearing Fund.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         Such analysis would also consider the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC's stress testing system as well as the then current composition of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to revise how the Methodology Description describes key assumptions underlying OCC's calculation of its liquidity needs. Such assumptions include: (1) A two-day liquidation horizon; (2) the default of a Clearing Member sometime between the collection of collateral on a given day and settlement of Clearing Member obligations to OCC on the following day (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the day of default, “D”); (3) the gross calculation of cash-settled option liquidity demands due on the morning of D; (4) the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) normally guarantees the settlement of any E&amp;A transactions; (5) the accounting of liquidity demands as required by relevant cross-margin agreements; (6) that auction bids for a defaulting Clearing Member's portfolio are represented by stressed prices at the contract level; (7) that credits that occur on the first day of a liquidation persist and are available to offset debits on subsequent days; (8) that auction proceeds settle on D+2; (9) liquidity demands associated with Specific Wrong Way Risk (“SWWR”) positions are included in the appropriate calculations; 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and (10) no early exercise of options occurs.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87673 (Dec. 6, 2019), 84 FR 67981 (Dec. 12, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-807); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718 (Dec. 11, 2019), 84 FR 68992 (Dec. 17, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-010).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         OCC believes standard expiration is generally more meaningful than early exercise risk when calculating the liquidity risk associated with E&amp;A activity. See Notice of Filing. 85 at 27476, n. 32. OCC provided data supporting this belief in a confidential Exhibit 3 to the Advance Notice.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Under the proposal, OCC would also make certain assumptions regarding the treatment of positions and cash flows based on timing. OCC would assume that positions with an expiration date of D+1 or greater will be liquidated via auction, and that option positions expiring on D-1 or D would be liquidated through normal OCC cash settlement processes or through physical settlement at NSCC. Under the proposed approach, cash inflows would be assumed to reduce outflows only for later dates.</P>
                <P>
                    To facilitate the maintenance of identified and collected liquidity resources, OCC proposes to require a two-day notice period for the substitution of non-cash collateral for cash in the Clearing Fund. Currently, a Clearing Member may execute a same-day substitution of Government Securities 
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     for cash deposits in the Clearing Fund. Where substitution would not cause a Clearing Member's settlement obligations to exceed the liquidity resources it has pledged to OCC, OCC would retain discretion to waive the proposed notice period. OCC stated that the proposed change is intended provide additional certainty around the level of liquidity resources available to OCC at any given time by fixing the amount of cash in the Clearing Fund, and thereby fixing the amount of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, for any given two-day liquidation horizon.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         OCC defines “Government Securities” as securities issued or guaranteed by the United States or Canadian Government, or by any other foreign government acceptable to the Corporation, except Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal Securities issued on Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (commonly called TIP-STRIPS). OCC By-Laws, Article I, Section 1.G.(5), available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.theocc.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/occ_bylaws.pdf.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 27478.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Liquidity Stress Testing</HD>
                <P>As noted above, OCC's liquidity stress testing would be based on output of its current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology. Daily, OCC performs stress tests designed to: (1) Determine whether OCC's collective financial resources are adequate to cover OCC's risk tolerance (“Adequacy Scenarios”); (2) establish the monthly size of the Clearing Fund based on the potential losses arising out of a 1-in-80 year hypothetical market event; (3) measure the exposure posed by individual Clearing Member Groups, and determine whether such exposure necessitates OCC calling for additional financial resources (“Sufficiency Scenarios”); and (4) monitor and assess the size of OCC's pre-funded financial resource against a wide range of stress scenarios that may include extreme but implausible and reverse stress testing scenarios (“Informational Scenarios”).</P>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to revise how the Methodology Description discusses OCC's stress testing and reporting processes to support the determination of its liquidity needs. OCC would change how it constructs portfolios for stress tests as well as how it aggregates stress test results consistent with the practices that OCC would follow in an actual liquidation of a defaulter's portfolio. Currently, OCC's processes focus on calculating the liquidating value of a portfolio. OCC proposes to revise its description of this process in its Methodology Description to highlight the importance of the timing of the cash flows during a liquidation because offsetting cash flows may occur on different days thus creating a liquidity demand during the process without a loss at the end of the process.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         OCC also proposes changes to clarify the structure of Clearing Member accounts. For example, Clearing Members maintain separate accounts for separate business types or cross-margining arrangements. Further, positions and collateral credited to a particular type of Clearing Member account (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         customer, firm or market-
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        maker) may be subject to a lien in favor of OCC, and such liens (or lack thereof depending on the account) would be contemplated in OCC's portfolio construction and aggregation processes.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <PRTPAGE P="35476"/>
                <P>
                    OCC proposes to rely on the output from its Sufficiency Scenarios and Adequacy Scenarios to evaluate its liquidity resources. Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would assess its Base Liquidity Resources against its Adequacy Scenarios. OCC's proposed processes for increasing its Base Liquidity Resources as needed are described below. Similarly, OCC would evaluate the sufficiency of its Available Liquidity Resources based on the Sufficiency Scenarios.
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC's proposed process for evaluating and supplementing its Available Liquidity Resources is also described below. OCC also proposes to make other conforming and organizational changes to the Methodology Description to reflect the implementation of the new liquidity stress testing approach and make other non-substantive clarifications to the document.
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         OCC also proposes to monitor and assess its liquidity resources under the Informational Scenarios. OCC would not be directly use the output of the Informational Scenarios to make decisions regarding the size of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         For example, OCC would reorganize the document to relocate content specific to credit stress testing to sections of the document focused only on credit stress testing. OCC is also making clarifying and conforming changes to differentiate the usage of Adequacy, Sizing, Sufficiency, and Informational Scenarios for credit and liquidity purposes. Further, OCC proposes changes to more accurately describe the scope of volatility instruments cleared by OCC.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        OCC proposes to clarify that in most SWWR stress test scenarios, SWWR Equity and ETN charges computed for margins are added to stress scenario profit and loss calculations in order to account for SWWR in the stress testing system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87673 (Dec. 6, 2019), 84 FR 67981 (Dec. 12, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-807) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718 (Dec. 11, 2019), 84 FR 68992 (Dec. 17, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-010). OCC also proposes removing duplicative language regarding Idiosyncratic Scenarios, Sizing Scenarios, and certain key assumptions from the executive summary of the Methodology Description because such information is covered in greater detail later in later sections of the document.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The proposed LRMF also sets forth certain internal reporting processes related to OCC's liquidity stress testing. Daily, OCC staff would be required to review the output of OCC's liquidity stress tests, and such review could lead to a change in the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources. At least monthly, OCC staff would be required to develop and review reports detailing and analyzing OCC's daily stress tests.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC would use the analysis provided in such reports to review the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC's stress tests. OCC staff would conduct such analyses more frequently than monthly when products cleared or markets served display high volatility or become less liquid, or when the size or concentration of positions held by OCC's participants increases significantly. OCC staff would be required to provide a summary of the results from its at least monthly review to OCC's Management Committee and the RC. At least annually, OCC staff would be required to assess the adequacy of OCC's stress testing methodology, and provide such assessment to the RC. Also at least annually, OCC staff would be required to perform a review of risk methodologies and the usage of any models to inform the management of liquidity risk.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         Additionally, OCC staff would develop internal reports regarding the sufficiency of OCC's liquidity resources.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Foreseeable Shortfalls</HD>
                <P>In determining the sufficiency of its liquidity resources as described above, OCC may identify a foreseeable liquidity shortfall. In such a situation, OCC's proposed changes provide OCC tools designed to address such foreseeable liquidity shortfalls not otherwise addressed by OCC's liquidity resources. The proposed LRMF contemplates mechanisms for increasing the size of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources. The proposed LRMF also describes OCC's plan for collecting additional resources when a Clearing Member Group's projected or actual liquidity risk exceeds certain thresholds (“Contingency Funding Plan”).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Increasing Base Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would maintain two tools by which it could increase its Base Liquidity Resources. As noted above, OCC maintains a committed credit facility with a syndicate of banks. The committed credit facility includes an uncommitted accordion feature,
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which OCC will endeavor to include in future iterations of the facility.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         An accordion is an uncommitted expansion of a credit facility generally on the same terms as a credit facility.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    OCC also requires Clearing Members to collectively contribute $3 billion in cash to the Clearing Fund (“CF Cash Requirement”). OCC's current rules already authorize each of OCC's Executive Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Operating Officer (collectively, the “OCEO”) individually to increase the CF Cash Requirement on a temporary basis for the protection of OCC, Clearing Members or the general public.
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC requires that such temporary increases be reviewed by the RC. OCC proposes to expand its authority to set and to temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement. OCC proposes to authorize its Board to adjust the CF Cash Requirement periodically except that the Board would not be permitted to set the CF Cash Requirement at an amount lower than $3 billion. OCC also proposes that the OCEO may temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement to respond to changing business or market conditions,
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and to require that the RCs' review of such an increase must (i) be based upon then-existing facts and circumstances, (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system, and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC also proposes to require that any increase in the CF Cash Requirement be satisfied no later than the second business day following notification unless the Clearing Member is notified by an officer of OCC an alternative time to satisfy such obligation.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         OCC utilized this authority in December 2019 when it informed Clearing Members that OCC would exercise this authority on January 3, 2020 to increase the CF Cash Requirement temporarily from $3 billion to $3.5 billion during the monthly sizing of the Clearing Fund. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88120 (Feb. 5, 2020), 85 FR 7812, 7814 n. 20 (Feb. 11, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-801).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         OCC also proposes shifting the location of such authorization in its rules from Rule 1002 to the proposed LRMF.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         The criteria proposed for the RC's review are currently the criteria required for a member of the OCEO to authorize a temporary increase.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         OCC currently requires such temporary increases to be satisfied no later than one hour before the close of Fedwire on the business day following notification by OCC. OCC stated that the change is designed to provide more clarity and simplicity by more closely aligning the timeframes for meeting an increase in the CF Cash Requirement with the timing for satisfying Clearing Fund deficits in the monthly and intra-month sizing processes. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 27477-78.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Addressing Shortfalls in Available Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>
                    Currently, OCC forecasts daily settlement obligations 30 days prior to a given settlement under normal market conditions and compares such demands to its resources. Based on such analysis, OCC may require a Clearing Member to deposit intra-day margin in the form of cash so that OCC's liquid financial resources would be sufficient to cover the Clearing Member's obligations. OCC proposes to replace its current forecasting process with an analysis of OCC's resources measured against the output of its Sufficiency Scenarios. Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35477"/>
                    take specific actions in the event that the output of its Sufficiency Scenarios for a given Clearing Member Group were to exceed one of two thresholds. Where OCC observes that the output of a Sufficiency Scenario is in excess of 80 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, OCC would initiate enhanced monitoring of the Clearing Member Group's liquidity demand.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Where OCC observes that the output of a Sufficiency Scenario is in excess of 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, OCC could require the Clearing Member Group to provide additional cash collateral (“Required Cash Deposits”).
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     OCC proposes to amend its rules such that a Required Cash Deposit could be imposed either as part of OCC's normal daily margin process or as a special intra-day margin call.
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         OCC described the process comprising such enhanced monitoring in a confidential Exhibit 3G provided as part of the proposal.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         The amount of a Required Cash Deposit would be equal to 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources less the relevant output of OCC's Sufficiency Scenario. Such a Required Cash Deposit could be provided as a substitute for non-cash collateral. OCC would generally require funding of Required Cash Deposits five business days before the date of the projected demand but may require funding up to 20 business days before the projected date as facts and circumstances may warrant.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         As proposed, OCC would generally require funding of Required Cash Deposits five business days before the date of the projected demand but could require funding up to 20 business days before the projected date.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Similar to margin calls designed to ensure the sufficiency of OCC's financial resources, OCC proposes to establish two thresholds for monitoring the potential impact of a Required Cash Deposit on the relevant Clearing Member.
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     If the Required Cash Deposit for an individual Clearing Member were to exceed $500 million or 75 percent of the Clearing Member's excess net capital, OCC staff would be required to notify OCC's OCEO. If the Required Cash Deposit for an individual Clearing Member were to exceed 100 percent of the Clearing Member's excess net capital, OCC staff would escalate the matter to the OCEO, any member of which would be authorized to approve such Required Cash Deposit. The thresholds described above would be subject to annual review and approval by the RC. Additionally, each member of the OCEO would be authorized to approve temporary changes to the thresholds described above.
                    <SU>31</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37858 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37572-73 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>31</SU>
                         The RC would be obligated to review any temporary change in thresholds within 20 days of the change to determine whether to make such change a permanent part of OCC's rules. The RC's determination must (i) be based upon then-existing facts and circumstances, (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system, and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Under the proposed LRMF, OCC would also have authority to impose Required Cash Deposits as a protective measure against a Clearing Member subject to enhanced monitoring and surveillance pursuant to OCC's watch level reporting process because OCC determines that the Clearing Member presents increased credit risk.
                    <SU>32</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Specifically, OCC proposes to authorize such a requirement by adopting new Rule 604(g). Under the proposed rule, a Clearing Member may be required to satisfy such required cash deposits through its daily margin requirements under Rule 601 or through intra-day margin calls under Rule 609.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>32</SU>
                         OCC's watch level reporting process is outlined in its Counterparty Credit Risk Management Policy. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82312 (Dec. 13, 2017), 82 FR 60242 (Dec. 19, 2017) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-009).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Replenishment of Liquidity Resources</HD>
                <P>OCC's proposed changes include rules describing OCC's process for replenishing liquidity resources employed during a stress event. The proposal includes clarification of OCC's authority to borrow cash collateral from the Clearing Fund. The proposal also clarifies OCC's authority to reject substitutions that would affect non-cash Clearing Fund collateral that has been used to access OCC's liquidity facilities. Additionally, OCC proposes changes to its rules to allow for the more timely declaration and allocation of certain losses charged to the Clearing Fund.</P>
                <P>
                    The cash contributions to OCC's Clearing Fund serve as an important source of liquidity for OCC to manage potential liquidity risks associated with a Clearing Member default or the failure or operational disruption of a bank or securities or commodities clearing organization. Currently, OCC's rules permit OCC to use the Clearing Fund for borrowing or otherwise obtaining funds to be used for liquidity purposes. OCC has stated, however, that it would likely not use Clearing Fund cash as collateral for a loan from a third-party.
                    <SU>33</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Rather, OCC would directly borrow Clearing Fund cash to manage the financial obligations of a defaulted Clearing Member. OCC proposes to amend its rules to clarify its authority to borrow directly from the Clearing Fund.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>33</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 27480.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The non-cash contributions to OCC's Clearing Fund provide a source of collateral necessary for OCC to access sources of liquidity such as OCC's liquidity facilities described above. Clearing Members may, from time to time, substitute new collateral for collateral already contributed to the Clearing Fund. OCC proposes to amend its rules to clarify its authority to reject substitutions that would affect collateral that OCC has already pledged as collateral to access its liquidity facilities.</P>
                <P>Under OCC's rules, amounts obtained through borrowing from the Clearing Fund are not considered losses charged against the Clearing Fund for a period of 30 days. Any transaction collateralized by Clearing Fund contributions that is outstanding for more than 30 days is considered an actual loss that OCC would then allocate to its Clearing Members, who would then be required to replenish the Clearing Fund. OCC proposes to amend its rules to authorize OCC to determine that an outstanding transaction collateralized by Clearing Fund contributions is a loss to be allocated to Clearing Members, even if that transaction has been outstanding for less than 30 days, which in turn would allow OCC to allocate the loss and replenish the Clearing Fund in a timely manner.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">D. Due Diligence of Liquidity Providers</HD>
                <P>
                    OCC's ability to manage its liquidity risk is dependent on a supporting institutions, such as settlement banks, custodian banks, central banks, and liquidity providers. The proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall framework for monitoring, managing, and limiting its risks and exposures to these supporting institutions.
                    <SU>34</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     This framework includes onboarding and monitoring processes, including: (1) Conducting due diligence to confirm each commercial institution meets OCC's financial and operational standards; (2) confirming each commercial institution's access to liquidity to meet its commitments to OCC; (3) monitoring and managing direct, affiliated, and concentrated exposures; and (4) conducting operational reviews of such institutions. The proposed LRMF also sets forth OCC's requirements for performing due diligence to confirm it has a reasonable 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35478"/>
                    basis to believe each of its liquidity providers has (1) sufficient information to understand and manage the potential liquidity demands of OCC and its associated liquidity risk and (2) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments to OCC, including the execution of periodic test borrows no less than once every 12 months to measure the performance and reliability of the liquidity facilities. Further, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's use of accounts and services at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago to custody funds to reduce counterparty credit risks.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>34</SU>
                         OCC's framework for monitoring, managing, and limiting its risks and exposures to these supporting institutions is primarily governed by OCC's CCRM. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82312 (Dec. 13, 2017), 82 FR 60242 (Dec. 19, 2017) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-009).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">E. Participant Capacity</HD>
                <P>
                    Currently, OCC requires that each Clearing Member have access to sufficient financial resources to meet obligations arising from clearing membership in extreme but plausible market conditions. OCC's rules do not address circumstances in which a Clearing Member has sufficient resources to meet its obligations but is unable to meet settlement obligations due to a failure or operational issue at its primary settlement bank. OCC proposes to require that each Clearing Member maintain adequate procedures, including but not limited to contingency funding, to ensure that it is able to meet its liquidity obligations as OCC members.
                    <SU>35</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>35</SU>
                         OCC regularly examines its Clearing Members for adherence to similar obligations arising out of OCC's membership requirements in connection with its existing annual Clearing Member examination process.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Commission Findings and Notice of No Objection</HD>
                <P>
                    Although the Clearing Supervision Act does not specify a standard of review for an advance notice, the stated purpose of the Clearing Supervision Act is instructive: To mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial stability by, among other things, promoting uniform risk management standards for SIFMUs and strengthening the liquidity of SIFMUs.
                    <SU>36</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>36</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         12 U.S.C. 5461(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act authorizes the Commission to prescribe regulations containing risk management standards for the payment, clearing, and settlement activities of designated clearing entities engaged in designated activities for which the Commission is the supervisory agency.
                    <SU>37</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act provides the following objectives and principles for the Commission's risk management standards prescribed under Section 805(a): 
                    <SU>38</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>37</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>38</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>• To promote robust risk management;</P>
                <P>• to promote safety and soundness;</P>
                <P>• to reduce systemic risks; and</P>
                <P>• to support the stability of the broader financial system.</P>
                <P>
                    Section 805(c) provides, in addition, that the Commission's risk management standards may address such areas as risk management and default policies and procedures, among other areas.
                    <SU>39</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>39</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(c).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission has adopted risk management standards under Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act and Section 17A of the Exchange Act (the “Clearing Agency Rules”).
                    <SU>40</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Clearing Agency Rules require, among other things, each covered clearing agency to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to meet certain minimum requirements for its operations and risk management practices on an ongoing basis.
                    <SU>41</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As such, it is appropriate for the Commission to review advance notices against the Clearing Agency Rules and the objectives and principles of these risk management standards as described in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act. As discussed below, the Commission believes the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with the objectives and principles described in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act,
                    <SU>42</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and in the Clearing Agency Rules, in particular Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7) and (e)(18).
                    <SU>43</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>40</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68080 (Oct. 22, 2012), 77 FR 66220 (Nov. 2, 2012) (S7-08-11). 
                        <E T="03">See also</E>
                         Covered Clearing Agency Standards, 81 FR 70786. The Commission established an effective date of December 12, 2016 and a compliance date of April 11, 2017 for the Covered Clearing Agency Standards. OCC is a “covered clearing agency” as defined in Rule 17Ad-22(a)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>41</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>42</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>43</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Consistency With Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act</HD>
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that the proposal contained in OCC's Advance Notice is consistent with the stated objectives and principles of Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act. Specifically, as discussed below, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with promoting robust risk management in the area of liquidity risk, promoting safety and soundness, reducing systemic risks, and supporting the stability of the broader financial system.
                    <SU>44</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>44</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that the proposed changes are consistent with promoting robust risk management at OCC with a particular focus on the area of liquidity risk. OCC is a SIFMU,
                    <SU>45</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and it is imperative that OCC have adequate resources to be able to satisfy its settlement obligations, including in the event of a Clearing Member default.
                    <SU>46</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As described above, OCC proposes to adopt rules describing OCC's (i) primary liquidity risks, (ii) liquidity resources, (iii) requirements for liquidity provider due diligence, and (iv) requirements for procedures designed to ensure Clearing Member capacity to meet liquidity obligations arising out of participation in OCC. The Commission believes that having rules and policies that clearly determine and describe OCC's liquidity risks and resources would facilitate OCC's ability to size its liquidity resources commensurate with the risks it faces. OCC proposes to size and test the sufficiency of its liquidity resources based on its current credit stress tests, which include extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Additionally, to support the application of OCC's current financial resource stress testing methodology to the management of liquidity risk, OCC proposes to revise its Methodology Description to describe the key assumptions underlying the calculation of OCC's liquidity needs. The Commission believes that measuring the sufficiency of OCC's resources based on extreme historical scenarios would support OCC's ability to manage such scenarios should they arise again. Further, the Commission believes that the incorporation of the key assumptions described above would strengthen OCC's understanding of its ability to meet its settlement obligations on time and in the required currency. Further, the proposal would require daily, monthly, and annual liquidity stress test-related reporting. The Commission believes that such reporting is necessary to provide risk management information to decision-makers within OCC because it would allow OCC to monitor its liquidity exposures under a variety of foreseeable stress scenarios, and to call for additional liquid resources in the form of cash deposits to ensure that OCC 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35479"/>
                    continues to maintain sufficient liquid resources to meet its settlement obligations with a high degree of confidence. Finally, the proposal would require OCC to conduct due diligence of its liquidity providers and would require each Clearing Member to maintain policies and procedures to ensure its ability to meet its obligations arising out of participation in OCC. The Commission believes that such due diligence and membership requirements would allow OCC to more closely monitor the financial and operational capacity of its liquidity providers and Clearing Members. Such monitoring, in turn, would increase the likelihood that liquidity resources would be available to OCC when necessary. Taken together, the Commission believes that such proposed changes would promote robust risk management practices at OCC, consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.
                    <SU>47</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>45</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) 2012 Annual Report, Appendix A, available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>46</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88317 (Mar. 4, 2020), 85 FR 13681, 13683 (Mar. 9, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-801) (citation omitted).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>47</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Commission also believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with promoting safety and soundness. OCC proposes changes to facilitate increases in its Base Liquidity Resources, thereby allowing OCC to address settlement obligations that could exceed its Base Liquidity Resources, which could otherwise lead to liquidity shortfalls. OCC proposes to adopt practices for monitoring its Available Liquidity Resources against liquidity exposures projected under its Sufficiency Scenarios and to require Clearing Members to provide additional cash collateral in the form of margin deposits to address settlement obligations that could exceed OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, which would further help mitigate against liquidity shortfalls. Additionally, in particular, the Contingency Funding Plan would provide for enhanced monitoring of any Clearing Member Group whose projected liquidity exposures under OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios exceed 80 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources. The proposal also would allow OCC to require Clearing Members subject to enhanced monitoring and surveillance under OCC's watch level reporting process to deposit additional cash margin as a protective measure. Finally, the proposed changes in the Advance Notice would impose a 2-day notice period for Clearing Fund cash collateral substitution requests, thereby providing at least two days of certainty regarding such resources, consistent with OCC's two-day liquidation horizon. The Commission believes that, taken together, these proposed changes would promote safety and soundness at OCC by ensuring that OCC is able to obtain funds to address its liquidity exposure, including settlement obligations that could otherwise exceed its liquidity resources.</P>
                <P>
                    The Commission further believes that determining and obtaining sufficient funds to meet OCC's liquidity exposure, including settlement obligations, in turn, would enhance OCC's ability to manage systemic risk and to support the broader financial system by reducing the likelihood that OCC, in failing to address such exposures and obligations, would become a conduit for liquidity stresses into the broader financial system. Under the proposal, OCC would size its Base Liquidity Resources in a manner designed to consider extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis, and would maintain such resources in anticipation of the occurrence of similarly severe market stresses. Sizing OCC's Base Liquidity Resources in this way would reduce the likelihood that OCC would be required to call for additional resources from, and thus impose potential liquidity pressure upon, Clearing Members and liquidity providers in times of potential market stress. Although OCC could impose Required Cash Deposits on Clearing Members in times of market stress, OCC's ability to manage the timing of this demand for liquidity up to 20 days in advance of the projected need would afford both OCC and its Clearing Members time to monitor and manage any potential stress such an action might cause. Further, as described above, in Section II.B.2. OCC proposes to establish thresholds for monitoring the potential effect of a Required Cash Deposit that could negatively impact a Clearing Member. Specifically, as noted above, OCC would consider a particular Clearing Member's ability to meet a Required Cash Deposit based on the absolute value of the Required Cash Deposit as well as how it relates to the affected Clearing Member's excess net capital. The Commission believes that prefunding Base Liquidity Resources, calling for Required Cash Deposits well in advance of a potential loss, and monitoring on an ex ante basis the potential impact on Clearing Members of Required Cash Deposits addresses both the need for OCC to manage its immediate liquidity needs and the need for OCC to identify and seek to manage any potential liquidity strains such actions may cause market participants. As such, the Commission believes that the Advance Notice is consistent with promoting safety and soundness, reducing systemic risks, and promoting the stability of the broader financial system as contemplated in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.
                    <SU>48</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>48</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the Commission believes the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.
                    <SU>49</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>49</SU>
                         12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) Under the Exchange Act</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Exchange Act requires that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively measure, monitor, and manage the liquidity risk that arises in or is borne by the covered clearing agency, including measuring, monitoring, and managing its settlement and funding flows on an ongoing and timely basis, and its use of intraday liquidity.
                    <SU>50</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>50</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Consistency With Sections (i), (vi), and (vii) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to require the maintenance of sufficient liquid resources at the minimum in all relevant currencies to effect same-day and, where appropriate, intraday and multiday settlement of payment obligations with a high degree of confidence under a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios that includes, but is not limited to, the default of the participant family that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation for the covered clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions.
                    <SU>51</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>51</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.A.1., the Advance Notice includes OCC's method for sizing its liquidity resources. First, the proposed LRMF describes OCC's overall approach to liquidity stress testing and liquidity resource sizing by relying on the stressed scenarios and prices generated under OCC's current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology, which the Commission has reviewed closely and believes would be consistent with identifying a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios.
                    <SU>52</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Specifically, the size 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35480"/>
                    of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources would be based upon an internal analysis summarizing OCC's liquidity demands under a variety of stress scenarios, including the sufficiency of OCC's Base Liquidity Resources against extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Second, OCC proposes to describe key assumptions underlying the calculation of its liquidity needs—such as a two-day liquidation horizon—as well as the treatment of cash flows such that cash inflows would be assumed to reduce outflows only for later dates. Finally, OCC would impose a two-day notice requirement on substitutions of Clearing Fund collateral to ensure access to cash Clearing Fund contributions throughout the two-day liquidation period. Taken together, the Commission believes that these proposed changes are reasonably designed to ensure that OCC sizes and maintains it liquidity resources consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>53</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>52</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37862-63 (Aug. 2, 
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008); Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37577-78 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>53</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to determine the amount and regularly test the sufficiency of its liquid resources held for purposes of meeting the minimum liquid resource requirement under paragraph (e)(7)(i) of this section by, at a minimum: (A) Conducting stress testing of its liquidity resources at least once each day using standard and predetermined parameters and assumptions; (B) conducting a comprehensive analysis on at least a monthly basis of the existing stress testing scenarios, models, and underlying parameters and assumptions used in evaluating liquidity needs and resources, and considering modifications to ensure they are appropriate for determining the clearing agency's identified liquidity needs and resources in light of current and evolving market conditions; (C) conducting a comprehensive analysis of the scenarios, models, and underlying parameters and assumptions used in evaluating liquidity needs and resources more frequently than monthly when the products cleared or markets served display high volatility or become less liquid, when the size or concentration of positions held by the clearing agency's participants increases significantly, or in other appropriate circumstances described in such policies and procedures; and (D) reporting the results of its analyses under Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(B) and (C) to appropriate decision makers at the covered clearing agency, including but not limited to, its risk management committee or board of directors, and using these results to evaluate the adequacy of and adjust its liquidity risk management methodology, model parameters, and any other relevant aspects of its liquidity risk management framework.
                    <SU>54</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to ensure the performance of model validation of its liquidity risk models not less than annually or more frequently as may be contemplated by the covered clearing agency's risk management framework.
                    <SU>55</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>54</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>55</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.A.2., OCC proposes to implement liquidity stress testing based on the output of its current stress testing and Clearing Fund methodology. After reviewing and assessing the proposal, including the methodology and results of OCC's proposed application of such output to its new liquidity stress testing approach, the Commission believes that the proposed changes described above are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) because OCC would assess its Base and Available Liquidity Resources against a set of stress scenarios, including extreme historical scenarios such as the 1987 market break and 2008 financial crisis. Further, the key assumptions described above in section II.A.1. would facilitate the application of OCC's current Clearing Fund stress testing outputs to the management of liquidity risk in a manner that would be consistent with OCC's management of credit risk. The Commission continues to believe that OCC's current stress testing methodology improved the testing of OCC's financial resources and increased the likelihood that OCC maintains sufficient resources at all times.
                    <SU>56</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Similarly, the Commission believes that the application of such a methodology to liquidity risk management would improve the testing of OCC's liquidity resources and increase the likelihood that OCC maintains sufficient liquid resources at all times. Further, the Commission believes that applying a consistent risk management approach across OCC's credit and liquidity risk exposures would support OCC's ability to maintain a more consistent, comprehensive view of its risk management processes more broadly
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>56</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83714 (Jul. 26, 2018), 83 FR 37570, 37578 (Aug. 1, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-803).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Additionally, the Commission believes that the daily review of liquidity stress tests, which may lead to a change in OCC's Base Liquidity Resources would be consistent with the daily stress testing requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(A). Similarly, the Commission believes that the at least monthly analysis of daily stress tests for review of the parameters and assumptions underlying OCC stress tests with more frequent analysis as required would be consistent with the monthly comprehensive analysis requirements set forth in Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(B) and (C). Likewise, the Commission believes that providing a summary of such monthly reporting, as well as an annual assessment of the adequacy of OCC's liquidity resources based on such reporting, to OCC's Management Committee and the RC would be consistent with the reporting requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi)(D). Finally, the Commission believes that the review of risk methodologies and the usage of any models to inform the management of liquidity risk at least annually would be consistent with the model validation requirements set forth in Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vii).</P>
                <P>
                    Taken together and for the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes that proposed approach to liquidity stress testing and reporting is consistent with the requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) and (vii) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>57</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>57</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi) and (vii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Consistency With Section (viii) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be reasonably designed to address foreseeable liquidity shortfalls that would not be covered by the covered clearing agency's liquid resources and avoid unwinding, revoking, or delaying the same-day settlement of payment obligations.
                    <SU>58</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>58</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.B.1., OCC proposes to revise the available mechanisms for increasing its Base Liquidity Resources. The Commission believes such changes would be consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) because they would allow OCC to address settlement obligations that could exceed its Base 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35481"/>
                    Liquidity Resources, which could otherwise lead to liquidity shortfalls. Specifically, by allowing OCC's Board to adjust the CF Cash Requirement, OCC would be able to adjust to increases in its liquidity needs by acquiring additional pre-funded liquidity resources. Similarly, the Commission believes that the proposed changes to the OCEO's authority to temporarily increase the CF Cash Requirement should allow OCC to quickly react to changes in both OCC's liquidity needs and liquidity resources while still preserving the required analysis and existing factors that OCC must consider under its current rules.
                </P>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.B.2., OCC proposes a new Contingency Funding Plan, which would be described in OCC's rules. The Commission believes that OCC's proposed Contingency Funding Plan would be consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) because it would allow OCC to collect additional liquidity resources to address settlement obligations that could exceed OCC's Available Liquidity Resources, which could otherwise lead to liquidity shortfalls. In particular, the Contingency Funding Plan would provide for enhanced monitoring of any Clearing Member Group whose projected liquidity exposures under OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios exceed 80 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources. Such monitoring should, in turn, facilitate OCC's ability to take further action as necessary, for example by temporarily increasing OCC's CF Cash Requirement. The Contingency Funding Plan would also provide OCC with additional liquidity resources in the form of cash margin deposits in the event that either (i) a Clearing Member Group's projected liquidity exposures under OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios exceed 90 percent of OCC's Available Liquidity Resources or (ii) it becomes necessary to impose protective measures on a Clearing Member on OCC's Watch List.
                    <SU>59</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>59</SU>
                         Such authority would be tempered by OCC's monitoring of the potential effect of calling for such resources based on the absolute value of the requirement as well as the size of the requirement relative to the affected Clearing Member's excess net capital.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Taken together and for the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes that proposed changes authorizing OCC to collect liquidity resources to address settlement obligations that could exceed its Base or Available Liquidity Resources are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>60</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>60</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(viii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">3. Consistency With Section (ix) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to effectively manage liquidity risk by, at a minimum, describing the covered clearing agency's process to replenish any liquid resources that the clearing agency may employ during a stress event.
                    <SU>61</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>61</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.C., OCC proposes to clarify and amend its rules related to borrowing Clearing Fund collateral. Specifically, OCC proposes to clarify its authority to borrow cash directly from the Clearing Fund and to reject substitution requests that would require the withdrawal of non-cash collateral that OCC has pledged to access a liquidity facility. The proposal would also authorize OCC to charge as a loss amounts obtained through borrowing against the Clearing Fund earlier than currently permitted under OCC's rules, thereby permitting OCC to require Clearing Members to provide collateral to replenish the Clearing Fund earlier than would otherwise be permitted under its existing rules. Taken together, the Commission believes that the proposed changes concerning OCC borrowing of Clearing Fund collateral and losses related to such borrowing are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>62</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>62</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(ix).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">4. Consistency With Section (iv) of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv) under the Exchange Act requires that the covered clearing agency's policies and procedures be designed to require the undertaking of due diligence to confirm that it has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers, whether or not such liquidity provider is a clearing member, has: (A) Sufficient information to understand and manage the liquidity provider's liquidity risks; and (B) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments to provide liquidity to the covered clearing agency.
                    <SU>63</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>63</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.D., the proposed LRMF explicitly contemplates OCC's due diligence for supporting institutions, including liquidity providers, to confirm OCC has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers has (1) sufficient information to understand and manage the potential liquidity demands of OCC and its associated liquidity risk and (2) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments. Such due diligence would include the execution of periodic tests at least once every 12 months to measure the performance and reliability of OCC's liquidity facilities. The Commission believes that proposed rules setting forth such due diligence requirements are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>64</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>64</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Accordingly, the Commission believes that implementation of Advance Notice would be consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>65</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>65</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) Under the Exchange Act</HD>
                <P>
                    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to establish objective, risk-based, and publicly disclosed criteria for participation, which require participants to have sufficient financial resources and robust operational capacity to meet obligations arising from participation in the clearing agency.
                    <SU>66</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>66</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    As described above in section II.E., OCC proposes to require that each Clearing Member maintain adequate procedures, including but not limited to contingency funding. More specifically, the proposed change would require Clearing Members to maintain procedures to address a failure or operational issue at a Clearing Member's settlement bank. Such a requirement would be in addition to the current requirement that Clearing Members have access to sufficient financial resources to meet obligations arising from clearing membership in extreme but plausible market conditions. The Commission believes that requiring Clearing Members to maintain such procedures would help to ensure that Clearing Members have the operational capacity to meet obligations arising from participation in OCC. The Commission believes, therefore, that the proposed change is consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) under the Exchange Act.
                    <SU>67</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>67</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <PRTPAGE P="35482"/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Conclusion</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore noticed,</E>
                     pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the Clearing Supervision Act, that the Commission 
                    <E T="03">does not object</E>
                     to the Advance Notice (SR-OCC-2020-802) and that OCC is 
                    <E T="03">authorized</E>
                     to implement the proposed change as of the date of this notice or the date of an order by the Commission approving proposed rule change SR-OCC-2020-003 whichever is later.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>By the Commission.</P>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12500 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89020; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2020-026]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rule 14.13 To Permit the Trading, Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     notice is hereby given that on June 3, 2020, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “EDGX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>The Exchange proposes a rule change to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges, of Tracking Fund Shares. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to Rule 14.1(a) to reference Tracking Fund Shares and proposed Rule 14.13, where applicable. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.</P>
                <P>
                    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
                    <E T="03">http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/</E>
                    ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Purpose</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 to permit the trading, pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”), of Tracking Fund Shares,
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which substantially conforms to Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”) Rule 14.11(m).
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make corresponding changes to Rule 14.1(a) to reference Tracking Fund Shares and proposed Rule 14.13, where applicable.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         The term “Tracking Fund Share” means a security that: (i) Represents an interest in an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company”) organized as an open-end management investment company, that invests in a portfolio of securities selected by the Investment Company's investment adviser consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives and policies; (ii) is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in return for a deposit of a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; (iii) when aggregated in the same specified minimum number, may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; and (iv) the portfolio holdings for which are disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 88887 (May 15, 2020) 85 FR 30990 (May 21, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2019-107) (the “BZX Approval Order”). The BZX proposal resulting in the BZX Approval Order involved several applications for exemptive relief that were filed with the Commission and for which public notice was issued on November 14, 2019 and a subsequent order granting certain exemptive relief to, among others, Fidelity Management &amp; Research Company and FMR Co., Inc., Fidelity Beach Street Trust, and Fidelity Distributors Corporation (File No. 812-14364), issued on December 10, 2019 (the “Application,” “Notice,” and “Order,” respectively, and, collectively, the “Exemptive Order”). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33683 (November 14, 2019), 84 FR 64140 (November 20, 2019) (the Notice) and 33712 (the Order). The Order specifically notes that “granting the requested exemptions is appropriate in and consistent with the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. It is further found that the terms of the proposed transactions, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and that the proposed transactions are consistent with the policy of each registered investment company concerned and with the general purposes of the Act.” The Exchange notes that it also referred to the application for exemptive relief orders (collectively, with the Application, the “Proxy Applications”) and notices thereof (collectively, with the Notice, the “Proxy Notices”) for T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Equity Series, Inc. (File No. 812-14214 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33685 and 33713), Natixis ETF Trust II, et al. (File No. 812-14870 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33684 and 33711), Blue Tractor ETF Trust and Blue Tractor Group, LLC (File No. 812-14625 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33682 and 33710), and Gabelli ETFs Trust, et al. (File No. 812-15036 and Investment Company Act Release Nos. 33681 and 33708). While there are certain differences between the applications, the Exchange believes that each would qualify as Tracking Fund Shares under BZX Rule 14.11(m).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange does not currently list any securities as a primary listing market.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with this fact, Exchange Rule 14.1(a) currently states that all securities traded on the Exchange are traded pursuant to UTP and that the Exchange will not list any securities before first filing and obtaining Commission approval of rules that incorporate qualitative listing criteria and comply with Rules 10A-3 
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10A-3”) and 10C-1 
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     (“Rule 10C-1”) under the Act. Therefore, the provisions of existing Rules 14.2 through 14.9, 14.11 through 14.12, and proposed Rule 14.13 that permit the listing of certain Equity Securities 
                    <FTREF/>
                    <SU>10</SU>
                      
                    <PRTPAGE P="35483"/>
                    will not be effective until the Exchange files a proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(2) under the Act to amend its rules to comply with Rule 10A-3 and 10C-1 under the Exchange Act and to incorporate qualitative listing criteria, and such proposed rule change is approved by the Commission. Considering the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 14.13 as set forth below.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that it does not currently list any securities nor does it intend to list any securities in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, plans to submit in the near future a proposal to amend its applicable Rules set forth in Chapter XIV in order to reflect this fact.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         Rule 10A-3 obligates the Exchange to prohibit the initial or continued listing of any security of an issuer that is not in compliance with certain required standards. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10A-3.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         Rule 10C-1 obligates the Exchange to establish listing standards that require each member of a listed issuer's compensation committee to be a member of the issuer's board and to be independent, as well as establish certain factors that an issuer must consider when evaluating the independence of a director. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         17 CFR 240.10C-1.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         As provided in Rule 14.1(a), the term “Equity Security” means, but is not limited to, common stock, secondary classes of common stock, preferred stock and similar issues, shares or certificates of 
                        <PRTPAGE/>
                        beneficial interest of trusts, notes, limited partnership interests, warrants, certificates of deposit for common stock, convertible debt securities, ADRs, CVRs, Investment Company Units, Trust Issued Receipts (including those based on Investment Shares), Commodity-Based Trust Shares, Currency Trust Shares, Partnership Units, Equity-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities, Currency-Linked Securities, Portfolio Depositary Receipts, Equity-Linked Debt Securities, Managed Portfolio Shares, and Exchange-Traded Funds. Further, the Exchange now proposes to include the term “Tracking Fund Shares” to the definition of Equity Security.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Proposed Listing Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    Proposed Rule 14.13 is substantially similar to BZX Rule 14.11(m) with the exception that BZX Rules provide for the delisting of securities,
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while the Exchange only trades securities pursuant to UTP.
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Accordingly, the proposed Rule 
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     provides that the Exchange will consider the termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under certain circumstances,
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while no such provision is provided in BZX Rule 14.11(m). Nonetheless, the Exchange believes the proposal will not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest and will not impose any significant burden on competition as it is substantially similar to Exchange Rules applicable to other product types which allow for the termination of UTP in those products.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As such, the Exchange believes the proposal raises no novel issues.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         BZX Rule 14.11(m)(4)(B)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Exchange Rules 14.13(d)(2)(C)(i) through 14.13(d)(2)(C)(vi).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Exchange Rules 14.3(g)(2), 14.11(d)(2)(B), and 14.12(d)(2)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Policy Discussion</HD>
                <P>
                    The purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of Exchange-Traded Funds (“ETFs”) 
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Investment Company Units.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         For purposes of this filing, the term ETF will include only Portfolio Depositary Receipts as defined in Rule 14.8, Investment Company Units as defined in Rule 14.2, and Exchange-Traded Fund Shares as defined in Rule 14.12, along with the equivalent products defined in the rules of other national securities exchanges.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that there is one additional substantive difference between proposed Rule 14.13 and Rule 14.2: Proposed Rule 14.13 would require a rule filing under Section 19(b) prior to listing any product on the Exchange meaning that no series of Tracking Fund Shares could be listed on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) and there are no proposed rules comparable to the quantitative portfolio holdings standards from Rule 14.2.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) will, however, require each series of Tracking Fund Shares to at a minimum disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in accordance with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                        <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, authorized participants, arbitrageurs, and other market participants (collectively, “Market Makers”) need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the Fund Portfolio. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         As provided in the Proxy Notices, funds and their respective advisers will take remedial actions as necessary if the funds do not function as anticipated. For the first three years after a launch, a fund will establish certain thresholds for its level of tracking error, premiums/discounts, and spreads, so that, upon the fund's crossing a threshold, the adviser will promptly call a meeting of the fund's board of directors and will present the board or committee with recommendations for appropriate remedial measures. The board would then consider the continuing viability of the fund, whether shareholders are being harmed, and what, if any, action would be appropriate. Specifically, the Proxy Applications and Proxy Notices provide that such a meeting would occur: (1) If the tracking error exceeds 1%; or (2) if, for 30 or more days in any quarter or 15 days in a row (a) the absolute difference between either the market closing price or bid/ask price, on one hand, and NAV, on the other, exceeds 2%, or (b) the bid/ask spread exceeds 2%.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         Tracking Fund Shares will be purchased or redeemed only in large aggregations, or “creation units,” and the Tracking Basket will constitute the names and quantities of instruments for both purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35484"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Notice at 64144. The Commission also notes that as long as arbitrage continues to keep the Fund's secondary market price and NAV close, and does so efficiently so that spreads remain narrow, that investors would benefit from the opportunity to invest in active strategies through a vehicle that offers the traditional benefits of ETFs. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Id., at 64145.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each fund and its Fund Portfolio will be publicly available at all times. Each series will disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website will also disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each fund as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended. The website and information will be publicly available at no charge.</P>
                <P>While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(d)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Surveillance</HD>
                <P>The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.</P>
                <P>As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily Fund Portfolio of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Halts</HD>
                <P>As described above, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D) provides that (i) the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present; and (ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Availability of Information</HD>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35485"/>
                    of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) high-speed line.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">Trading Rules</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate trading in Tracking Fund Shares during all trading sessions.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         With respect to trading in Tracking Fund Shares, all of the EDGX Member obligations relating to product description and prospectus delivery requirements will continue to apply in accordance with Exchange rules and federal securities laws, and the Exchange will continue to monitor its Members for compliance with such requirements.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Statutory Basis</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 14.13 is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the proposed rules relating to listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares provide specific initial and continued listing criteria required to be met by such securities. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(1) provides the initial listing criteria for a series of Tracking Fund Shares, which include the following: (i) For each series, the Exchange will establish a minimum number of Tracking Fund Shares required to be outstanding at the time of commencement of trading on the Exchange; (ii) the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares that the NAV per share for the series will be calculated daily and that each of the following will be made available to all market participants at the same time when disclosed: The NAV, the Tracking Basket, and the Fund Portfolio; and (iii) all Tracking Fund Shares will have a stated investment objective which shall be adhered to under Normal Market Conditions.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         proposed Rule 14.13(c)(4).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2) provides that each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be listed and traded (including trading pursuant to UTP) on the Exchange subject to application of the following continued listing criteria: (i) The Tracking Basket will be disseminated at least once daily and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (ii) the Fund Portfolio will at a minimum be publicly disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter and will be made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) upon termination of an Investment Company, the Exchange requires that Tracking Fund Shares issued in connection with such entity be removed from listing on the Exchange; and (iv) voting rights shall be as set forth in the applicable Investment Company prospectus or Statement of Additional Information.</P>
                <P>Additionally, proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(C) provides that the Exchange will consider the suspension of trading in or removal from listing of or termination of UTP for a series of Tracking Fund Shares under any of the following circumstances: (i) If, following the initial twelve-month period after commencement of trading on the Exchange of a series of Tracking Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50 beneficial holders of the series of Tracking Fund Shares for 30 or more consecutive trading days; (ii) if either the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio is not made available to all market participants at the same time; (iii) if the Investment Company issuing the Tracking Fund Shares has failed to file any filings required by the Commission or if the Exchange is aware that the Investment Company is not in compliance with the conditions of any exemptive order or no-action relief granted by the Commission to the Investment Company with respect to the series of Tracking Fund Shares; (iv) if any of the requirements set forth in this rule are not continuously maintained; (v) if any of the applicable Continued Listing Representations for the issue of Tracking Fund Shares are not continuously met; or (vi) if such other event shall occur or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable.</P>
                <P>Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(i) provides that the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt trading in a series of Tracking Fund Shares. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the series of Tracking Fund Shares inadvisable. These may include: (i) The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Tracking Basket or Fund Portfolio; or (ii) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. Proposed Rule 14.13(d)(2)(D)(ii) if the Exchange becomes aware that one of the following is not being made available to all market participants at the same time: The net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio with respect to a series of Tracking Fund Shares, then the Exchange will halt trading in such series until such time as the net asset value, the Tracking Basket, or the Fund Portfolio is available to all market participants, as applicable.</P>
                <P>
                    While not providing daily disclosure of the Fund Portfolio could open the door to potential information leakage and misuse of material non-public information, the Exchange believes that proposed Rules 14.13(b)(5) and (6) provide sufficient safeguards to prevent such leakage and misuse of information. The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35486"/>
                    the Shares as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to information protection enumerated under proposed Rule 14.13(b)(6) will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to a Fund Portfolio, the Tracking Basket, or changes thereto. The requirement that any person or entity, including a custodian, Reporting Authority, distributor, or administrator, who has access to nonpublic information regarding the Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto, must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the applicable Fund Portfolio or the Tracking Basket or changes thereto will act to prevent any individual or entity from sharing such information externally. Additionally, the requirement that any such person or entity that is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer will erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the person or entity and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such Fund Portfolio or Tracking Basket will act to make sure that no entity will be able to misuse the data for their own purposes. As such, the Exchange believes that this proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.
                </P>
                <P>The Exchange believes that these proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares because they provide meaningful requirements about both the data that will be made publicly available about Tracking Fund Shares (the Tracking Basket) as well as the information that will only be available to certain parties and the controls on such information. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the requirements related to firewalls and information protection will act as a strong safeguard against any misuse and improper dissemination of information related to the securities included in or changes made to the Fund Portfolio and/or the Tracking Basket.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, the purpose of the structure of Tracking Fund Shares is to provide investors with the traditional benefits of ETFs while protecting funds from the potential for front running or free riding of portfolio transactions, which could adversely impact the performance of a fund. While each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be actively managed and, to that extent, similar to certain Investment Company Units (as defined in Rule 14.2), Tracking Fund Shares differ from Investment Company Units in one key way.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     A series of Tracking Fund Shares will disclose the Tracking Basket on a daily basis which, as described above, is designed 
                    <E T="03">to closely track</E>
                     the performance of the holdings of the Investment Company, instead of the 
                    <E T="03">actual holdings</E>
                     of the Investment Company, as provided by a series of Managed Fund Shares.
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 9.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 10.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>For the arbitrage mechanism for any ETF to function effectively, Market Makers need sufficient information to accurately value shares of a fund to transact in both the primary and secondary market. The Tracking Basket is designed to closely track the daily performance of the holdings of a series of Tracking Fund Shares.</P>
                <P>
                    Given the correlation between the Tracking Basket and the Fund Portfolio,
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Exchange believes that the Tracking Basket would serve as a pricing signal to identify arbitrage opportunities when its value and the secondary market price of the shares of a series of Tracking Fund Shares diverge. If shares began trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket, an authorized participant could purchase the shares in secondary market transactions and, after accumulating enough shares to comprise a creation unit,
                    <SU>29</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     redeem them in exchange for a redemption basket reflecting the NAV per share of the fund's portfolio holdings. The purchases of shares would reduce the supply of shares in the market, and thus tend to drive up the shares' market price closer to the fund's NAV. Alternatively, if shares are trading at a premium, the transactions in the arbitrage process are reversed. Market Makers also can engage in arbitrage without using the creation or redemption processes. For example, if a fund is trading at a premium to the Tracking Basket, Market Makers may sell shares short and take a long position in the Tracking Basket securities, wait for the trading prices to move toward parity, and then close out the positions in both the shares and the securities, to realize a profit from the relative movement of their trading prices. Similarly, a Market Maker could buy shares and take a short position in the Tracking Basket securities in an attempt to profit when shares are trading at a discount to the Tracking Basket.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>29</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>Overall, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage process would operate similarly to the arbitrage process in place today for existing ETFs that use in-kind baskets for creations and redemptions that do not reflect the ETF's complete holdings but nonetheless produce performance that is highly correlated to the performance of the ETF's actual portfolio. The Exchange has observed highly efficient trading of ETFs that invest in markets where security values are not fully known at the time of ETF trading, and where a perfect hedge is not possible, such as international equity and fixed-income ETFs. While the ability to value and hedge many of these existing ETFs in the market may be limited, such ETFs have generally maintained an effective arbitrage mechanism and traded efficiently.</P>
                <P>
                    As provided in the Notice, the Commission believes that an arbitrage mechanism based largely on the combination of a daily disclosed Tracking Basket and at a minimum quarterly disclosure of the Fund Portfolio can work in an efficient manner to maintain a fund's secondary market prices close to its NAV.
                    <SU>30</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Consistent with the Commission's view, the Exchange believes that the arbitrage mechanism for Tracking Fund Shares will be sufficient to keep secondary market prices in line with NAV.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>30</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         supra note 13.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    The Exchange notes that a significant amount of information about each series of Tracking Fund Shares and its Fund Portfolio will be required to be made publicly available at all times. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to disclose the Tracking Basket, which is designed to closely track the daily performance of the Fund Portfolio, on a daily basis. Each series of Tracking Fund Shares will at a minimum be required to publicly disclose the entirety of its portfolio holdings, including the name, identifier, market value and weight of each security and instrument in the portfolio within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter in a manner consistent with normal disclosure requirements otherwise applicable to open-end investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per share basis for each Fund, the prior business day's NAV and the closing price or bid/ask price at the time of calculation of 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35487"/>
                    such NAV, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the closing price or bid/ask price against such NAV. The website for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will also be required disclose the percentage weight overlap between the holdings of the Tracking Basket compared to the Fund Holdings for the prior business day and any information regarding the bid/ask spread for each series of Tracking Fund Shares as may be required for other ETFs under Rule 6c-11 under the 1940 Act, as amended.
                </P>
                <P>The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of Tracking Fund Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products. The Exchange will require the issuer of each series of Tracking Fund Shares traded on the Exchange to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.</P>
                <P>As noted in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(4), the Investment Company's investment adviser will upon request make available to the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, the daily portfolio holdings of each series of Tracking Fund Shares. The Exchange believes that this is appropriate because it will provide the Exchange and/or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, with access to the daily Fund Portfolio of any series of Tracking Fund Shares upon request on an as needed basis. The Exchange believes that the ability to access the information on an as needed basis will provide it with sufficient information to perform the necessary regulatory functions associated with trading series of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange, including the ability to monitor compliance with the initial and continued listing requirements as well as the ability to surveil for manipulation of the shares.</P>
                <P>
                    As noted above, Form N-PORT requires reporting of a fund's complete portfolio holdings on a position-by-position basis on a quarterly basis within 60 days after fiscal quarter end. Investors can obtain a fund's Statement of Additional Information, its Shareholder Reports, its Form N-CSR, filed twice a year, and its Form N-CEN, filed annually. A fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Investment Company, and those documents and the Form N-PORT, Form N-CSR, and Form N-CEN may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at 
                    <E T="03">www.sec.gov.</E>
                     The Exchange also notes that the Proxy Applications provide that an issuer will comply with Regulation Fair Disclosure, which prohibits selective disclosure of any material non-public information, which otherwise do not apply to issuers of Tracking Fund Shares.
                </P>
                <P>Information regarding market price and trading volume of the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the shares of each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the shares for each series of Tracking Fund Shares will be required to be available via the CTA high-speed line. The Exchange deems Tracking Fund Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in such shares to be subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. As provided in proposed Rule 14.13(b)(3), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in securities traded on the Exchange is $0.01.</P>
                <P>For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition</HD>
                <P>The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. Rather, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the trading pursuant to UTP of a new type of actively-managed exchange-traded product, thus enhancing competition among both market participants and listing venues, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others</HD>
                <P>The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action</HD>
                <P>
                    Because the 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 
                    <SU>31</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>32</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>31</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>32</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 
                    <SU>33</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
                    <SU>34</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative upon filing. The Exchange states that a waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would allow for the immediate trading, pursuant to UTP, of Tracking Fund Shares on the Exchange and therefore would provide investors with an additional trading venue option. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.
                    <SU>35</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>33</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>34</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>35</SU>
                         For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35488"/>
                    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.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments</HD>
                <P>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:</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments</HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ); or
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov.</E>
                     Please include File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-026 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper Comments</HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.</P>
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-026. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2020-026 and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.
                </FP>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>36</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>36</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12525 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89016; File No. SR-CboeEDGA-2020-005]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend the Rule Relating to MidPoint Discretionary Orders To Allow Optional Offset or Quote Depletion Protection Instructions</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Introduction</HD>
                <P>
                    On February 28, 2020, Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGA”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     a proposed rule change to amend EDGA Rule 11.8(e), which describes the handling of MidPoint Discretionary Orders entered on the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                     on March 10, 2020.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On April 16, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     On May 20, 2020, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which replaced and superseded the proposed rule change as originally filed.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission received no comment letters on the proposal. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88323 (March 5, 2020), 85 FR 13957.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88664, 85 FR 22465 (April 22, 2020). The Commission designated June 8, 2020 as the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised the proposal to: (1) Modify the circumstances that would enable or refresh a QDP active period (
                        <E T="03">see infra</E>
                         note 15); (2) set the QDP active period as 2 milliseconds; (3) include additional justification in support of the proposed rule change, including data in support of the QDP functionality; and (4) make technical and conforming changes. Amendment No. 1 is available at 
                        <E T="03">https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboeedga-2020-005/srcboeedga2020005-7240760-217168.pdf</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 1</HD>
                <P>
                    A MidPoint Discretionary Order (“MDO”) is a limit order to buy that is pegged to the national best bid (“NBB”), with discretion to execute at prices up to and including the midpoint of the national best bid or offer (“NBBO”), or a limit order to sell that is pegged to the national best offer (“NBO”), with discretion to execute at prices down to and including the midpoint of the NBBO.
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange proposes to amend EDGA Rule 11.8(e) to introduce two optional instructions that Users 
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     would be able to include on MDOs entered on the Exchange. First, the Exchange would allow Users to enter MDOs with an offset to the NBBO, similar to orders entered with a Primary Peg Instruction today.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Second, the Exchange would allow Users to enter MDOs that include a Quote Depletion Protection (“QDP”) instruction that would disable discretion (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the order's ability to execute at a more aggressive price than its ranked price) for a limited period in certain circumstances where the best bid or offer displayed on the EDGA Book 
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     is executed below one round lot.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGA Rule 11.8(e).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         A “User” is any member or sponsored participant who is authorized to obtain access to the Exchange's trading system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGA Rule 1.5(ee).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGA Rule 11.6(j)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         The “EDGA Book” is the electronic file of orders for the Exchange's trading system. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGA Rule 1.5(d).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Offset Instruction</HD>
                <P>
                    As proposed, MDOs entered with an offset would function in the same manner as currently implemented for Primary Peg orders entered with an offset pursuant to Rule 11.6(j)(2). First, a User entering an MDO would be able to select an offset equal to or greater than one minimum price variation (“MPV”) above or below the NBB or NBO to which the order is pegged (“Offset Amount”). Second, the Offset Amount for an MDO that is to be displayed on the EDGA Book would 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35489"/>
                    need to result in the price of such order being inferior to or equal to the inside quote on the same side of the market.
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The offset functionality would be an optional feature that Users could include when entering an MDO for trading on the Exchange.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         An MDO defaults to a displayed instruction unless the User includes a non-displayed instruction on the order. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         EDGA Rule 11.8(e)(4). Similar to the current handling of orders entered with a Primary Peg instruction, the Exchange is not proposing to accept displayed MDOs with an aggressive offset at this time. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 5 n.6.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    In addition, the Exchange proposes to make conforming changes to EDGA Rule 11.8(e) to account for the offset functionality. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend language in the introductory paragraph to Rule 11.8(e) and subparagraphs (e)(6) and (8).
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     According to the Exchange, these changes reflect the proposed operation of MDOs entered with an offset and would not otherwise impact the handling of MDOs entered on the Exchange.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         For a detailed description of these proposed changes, 
                        <E T="03">see</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 6-7.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 7.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Quote Depletion Protection</HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange also proposes to introduce QDP, an optional instruction that Users could enable on an MDO to limit the order's ability to exercise discretion in certain circumstances.
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The QDP feature would do this by tracking significant executions of orders that constitute the best bid or offer on EDGA.
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     As proposed, a “QDP Active Period” would be enabled or refreshed for buy (sell) MDOs if the best bid (offer) displayed on the EDGA Book is executed below one round lot.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     When a QDP Active Period is initially enabled, or refreshed by a subsequent execution of the best bid (offer) then displayed on the EDGA Book, it would remain enabled for two milliseconds.
                    <SU>17</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     During this QDP Active Period, an MDO entered with a QDP instruction would not exercise discretion. Instead, such an order would be only be executable at its ranked price.
                    <SU>18</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The ranked price is always executable unless the User cancels the order from the book.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         Proposed changes related to the introduction of the QDP instruction are reflected in proposed subparagraph (10) under EDGA Rule 11.8(e).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         The Exchange initially proposed that the QDP Active Period also could be enabled or refreshed in certain circumstances by significant cancellations. Amendment No. 1 removed this aspect of the proposal.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         Rule 611 of Regulation NMS generally limits executions to prices that are at or better than the protected best bid or offer. However, there are circumstances, such as the use of intermarket sweep orders, where an order may be executed at an inferior price. In these circumstances, an execution of the EDGA BBO below one round lot would trigger a QDP Active Period even though that quotation is inferior to the NBBO. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.10.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>17</SU>
                         The QDP Active Period would always last for at least two milliseconds. If the QDP Active Period is refreshed by a subsequent execution, such execution would result in a new two millisecond timer being started. Although the MDO would not exercise discretion during the QDP Active Period, its priority would not be impacted, and any applicable priority at its pegged price would be retained when QDP is enabled. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.12.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>18</SU>
                         An MDO's ranked price is the order's displayed or non-displayed pegged price, which may or may not include an offset, as proposed, or the order's limit price if that limit price is less aggressive than the applicable pegged price. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 8 n.11.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Unless the User chooses otherwise, an MDO to buy (sell) entered with a QDP instruction would default to a non-displayed instruction and would include an Offset Amount equal to one MPV below (above) the NBB (NBO).
                    <SU>19</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>19</SU>
                         The Exchange also proposes to amend EDGA Rule 11.8(e)(4) to reflect the fact that MDOs entered with a QDP instruction would default to non-displayed. MDOs that are not entered with the QDP instruction would continue to default to a displayed instruction, as currently provided in EDGA Rule 11.8(e)(4). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 9 n.13.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Discussion and Commission Findings</HD>
                <P>
                    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
                    <SU>20</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
                    <SU>21</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, and not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>20</SU>
                         In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>21</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>EDGA proposes to introduce optional instructions that (1) would allow Users to enter MDOs with an offset to the NBB or NBO and (2) enter MDOs with a QDP instruction that would disable discretion for 2 milliseconds where the best bid or offer displayed on the EDGA Book is executed below one round lot. The Exchange asserts that similar offset functionality is already available on the Exchange in both the Primary Peg order type and the Discretionary Range instruction. EDGA further believes that the flexibility to specify an offset would be beneficial for market participants that require additional discretion to manage their order flow on the Exchange.  </P>
                <P>
                    The Exchange states that the QDP instruction is intended to provide Users with a protective feature that limits an order's ability to exercise discretion in certain circumstances that may indicate that the market is moving against the resting MDO.
                    <SU>22</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Exchange provided data for a ten day period that tested the potential performance of the proposed QDP instruction in protecting Users from a potential negative price move by observing market movements in the two milliseconds following instances where QDP would have been enabled due to the execution of the EDGA best bid or offer. The Exchange concluded that the data showed: (1) MDOs entered with a QDP instruction could benefit from avoiding potentially impactful executions within the order's discretionary range when there are impending price moves; and (2) even though the market might remain static after QDP is enabled, the opportunity cost for disabling discretion in those circumstances is small as QDP would only be enabled for a limited period of time during the trading day.  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>22</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Amendment No. 1, 
                        <E T="03">supra</E>
                         note 6, at 17-18.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that the QDP feature is reasonably designed to allow market participants who utilize MDOs the opportunity to avoid an unfavorable execution when the market moves against a resting MDO. In reaching this conclusion, the Commission evaluated the proposed rule change and the data provided by the Exchange demonstrating correlation between the operation of the QDP feature and price instability on the EDGA market. In particular, the data indicates that: (i) There is a reasonable likelihood that the market will move against a resting MDO or remain static during a QDP Active Period; and (ii) a QDP Active Period would be active on average less than a half second per trading day per symbol. In addition, the QDP instruction is designed so that, during the QDP Active Period, only the discretion to execute at a more aggressive price would be suppressed and therefore an MDO, whether displayed or non-displayed, would still be accessible to liquidity takers at its ranked price. Finally, no User would be required to use either of the two proposed order instructions for the MDO (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     NBBO offset and QDP); it is optional functionality that would be 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35490"/>
                    available to Users who believe it may better effect their trading strategies. Therefore, the Commission believes that providing market participants the ability to use this optional tool to potentially improve the quality of their executions would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and protect investors and the public interest.  
                </P>
                <P>
                    The Commission also notes that there is current, existing functionality for discretionary orders that is similar, although not identical, to both the offset and QDP instructions on the Exchange 
                    <SU>23</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and other national securities exchanges.
                    <SU>24</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     For the NBBO offset in particular, the Commission notes that the proposed offset instruction is a close variant of the discretion and pegging functionality that the Commission has approved under past exchange proposals.
                    <SU>25</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     These functionalities continue to exist on the Exchange and on other exchanges.
                    <SU>26</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                      
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>23</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         EDGA Rule 11.6(j)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>24</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         IEX Rule 11.190(b)(10), Nasdaq Rule 4703(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>25</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73592 (Nov. 13, 2014), 79 FR 68937 (Nov. 19, 2014).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>26</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         EDGA Rule 11.6(d); EDGA Rule 11.6(j)(2); Nasdaq Rule 4703(g). The Commission notes that the Exchange and other exchanges offer order types or instructions that would permit an order with discretion or an order with pegging functionality (or both, in some cases) to rest more passively on the exchange's book (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         further away from the NBB or NBO). As noted above, the Exchange offers both a Discretionary Range instruction (which would allow a discretionary order to rest passively) and a Primary Peg instruction (which would allow an order to be pegged one or more MPVs away from the NBB or NBO). Other exchange rules permit a discretionary order to be combined with a pegged order and would allow for a passive offset. 
                        <E T="03">See, e.g.,</E>
                         Nasdaq Rule 4703(g).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Commission believes that this proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Exchange Act. The Commission believes that the proposed rule change is reasonably designed to promote fair and orderly markets, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.  </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule Change  </HD>
                <P>Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments  </HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ); or  
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov</E>
                    . Please include File Number SR-CboeEDGA-2020-005 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper Comments  </HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.  </P>
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGA-2020-005. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGA-2020-005, and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.  
                </FP>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1  </HD>
                <P>
                    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No. 1 in the 
                    <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                    . In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange further revised the proposal to: (1) Modify the circumstances that would enable or refresh a QDP active period; (2) set the QDP active period as 2 milliseconds; (3) include additional justification in support of the proposed rule change, including data in support of the QDP functionality; and (4) make technical and conforming changes. The changes and additional information in Amendment No. 1 add additional clarity to the original substance of the proposed rule change. In addition, the content of Amendment No. 1 assists the Commission's determination of whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>27</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>27</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">VI. Conclusion  </HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">It is therefore ordered,</E>
                     pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
                    <SU>28</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     that the proposed rule change (SR-CboeEDGA-2020-005), as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis.  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>28</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">Id.</E>
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>29</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                          
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>29</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                      
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,  </NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                  
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12521 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]  </FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Release No. 34-89011; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2020-049]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Exempt Tracking Fund Shares Listed Pursuant to Rule 14.11(m) From Certain Governance Requirements</SUBJECT>
                <DATE>June 4, 2020.</DATE>
                <P>
                    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     notice is hereby given that on June 3, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “BZX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35491"/>
                    The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>The Exchange proposes a rule change to provide an exemption to certain governance requirements for series of Tracking Fund Shares listed on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 14.11(m).</P>
                <P>
                    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
                    <E T="03">http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/</E>
                    ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">1. Purpose</HD>
                <P>
                    On May 15, 2020, the Commission approved an Exchange proposal to adopt BZX Rule 14.11(m) related to the listing and trading of Tracking Fund Shares 
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     on the Exchange.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Currently, Rule 14.10(e)(1)(E) provides an exemption to certain audit committee requirements provided under Rule 14.10(c)(3) for funds listed on the Exchange that are Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares. Specifically, Rule 14.10(e)(1)(E) provides that “management investment companies that are Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares, as defined in Rules 14.11(c), 14.11(i), 14.11(k), and 14.11(l), respectively, are exempt from the Audit Committee requirements set forth in Rule 14.10(c)(3), except for the applicable requirements of SEC Rule 10A-3.” 
                    <SU>7</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         The term “Tracking Fund Share” means a security that: (i) Represents an interest in an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company”) organized as an open-end management investment company, that invests in a portfolio of securities selected by the Investment Company's investment adviser consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives and policies; (ii) is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in return for a deposit of a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; (iii) when aggregated in the same specified minimum number, may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a specified Tracking Basket and/or a cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value; and (iv) the portfolio holdings for which are disclosed within at least 60 days following the end of every fiscal quarter.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88887 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 30990 (May 21, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2019-107) (the “Approval Order”). While the Approval Order approved the listing and trading of several series of Tracking Fund Shares, the Exchange notes that those series have not yet listed on the Exchange.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>7</SU>
                         The Exchange notes that it recently submitted a similar proposal to add Managed Portfolio Shares to the exemption under Rule 14.10(e)(1)(E). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88075 (January 29, 2020), 85 FR 6240 (February 4, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2020-010).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares are exempted from the requirements of Rule 14.10(c)(3) because they are otherwise subject to the accounting and auditing requirements of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”), including Section 32(a).
                    <SU>8</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Because Tracking Fund Shares are also subject to the accounting and auditing requirements under the 1940 Act and are so similarly situated to Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares, the Exchange believes that Tracking Fund Shares should be subject to and exempt from the same corporate governance requirements associated with listing on the Exchange. As such, the Exchange is proposing to make a change to amend Rule 14.10(e)(1)(E) in order to add Tracking Fund Shares to the list of product types listed on the Exchange that are exempted from the Audit Committee requirements set forth in Rule 14.10(c)(3), except for the applicable requirements of SEC Rule 10A-3.
                    <SU>9</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>8</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 80a-31.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>9</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.10A-3.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">2. Statutory Basis  </HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 
                    <SU>10</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 
                    <SU>11</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>10</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>11</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>The Exchange believes that this change to amend Rule 14.10(e)(1)(E) in order to add Tracking Fund Shares to a list of product types listed on the Exchange, including Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares, that are exempted from the Audit Committee requirements set forth in Rule 14.10(c)(3), except for the applicable requirements of SEC Rule 10A-3 is consistent with the Act because it is meant only to subject Tracking Fund Shares to the same corporate governance requirements currently applicable to the very similar product structures of Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares.  </P>
                <P>For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition  </HD>
                <P>
                    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. To the contrary, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would promote both intermarket and intramarket competition by exempting Tracking Fund Shares from the audit committee requirements set forth in Rule 14.10(c)(3) except for the applicable requirements of SEC Rule 10A-3. This is consistent with exemptions provided to Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares, which, like Tracking Fund Shares, are otherwise subject to the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35492"/>
                    audit committee requirements of the 1940 Act, including Section 32(a).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others  </HD>
                <P>The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action  </HD>
                <P>
                    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 
                    <SU>12</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
                    <SU>13</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                      
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>12</SU>
                         15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>13</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>
                    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 
                    <SU>14</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
                    <SU>15</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative upon filing. The Exchange stated that it believes that waiving the operative delay will allow any series of Tracking Fund Shares that lists on the Exchange in the near future to take advantage of this exemption to certain audit committee requirements and not have to either delay launch or take short-term remedial measures to comply with all requirements of Rule 14.10(c)(3).  
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>14</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>15</SU>
                         17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>
                    The Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is appropriate because, as the Exchange stated, the rule proposal is requesting an exemption to certain audit committee requirements that is currently granted to Managed Fund Shares, Index Fund Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares, and ETF Shares, and there are no unique issues associated with proving such an exemption to Tracking Fund Shares that have not already been considered by the Commission or that would warrant disparate treatment. Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.
                    <SU>16</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                      
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>16</SU>
                         For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                  
                <P>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.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Solicitation of Comments  </HD>
                <P>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:</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Electronic Comments  </HD>
                <P>
                    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ); or  
                </P>
                <P>
                    • Send an email to 
                    <E T="03">rule-comments@sec.gov.</E>
                     Please include File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-049 on the subject line.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">Paper Comments  </HD>
                <P>• Send paper comments in triplicate to: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.</P>
                  
                <FP>
                    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-049. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (
                    <E T="03">http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</E>
                    ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-049 and should be submitted on or before July 1, 2020.  
                </FP>
                <SIG>
                    <P>
                        For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
                        <SU>17</SU>
                        <FTREF/>
                          
                    </P>
                    <FTNT>
                        <P>
                            <SU>17</SU>
                             17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
                        </P>
                    </FTNT>
                      
                    <NAME>J. Matthew DeLesDernier,  </NAME>
                    <TITLE>Assistant Secretary.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
                  
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12517 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]  </FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 8011-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF STATE</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Public Notice 11135]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Passport Demand Forecasting Survey</SUBJECT>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of request for public comment.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>The Department of State is seeking Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment preceding submission of the collection to OMB.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The Department will accept comments from the public up to August 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>You may submit comments by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Web:</E>
                         Persons with access to the internet may comment on this notice by going to 
                        <E T="03">www.Regulations.gov</E>
                        . You can search for the document by entering “Docket Number: DOS-2020-0023” in the Search field. Then click the “Comment Now” button and complete the comment form.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Email: passportstudy@state.gov</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Regular Mail:</E>
                         Send written comments to: U.S. Department of State, attn.: Division Chief, CA/PPT/S/PPS/SP, 44132 Mercure Circle, P.O. Box 1227, Sterling, VA 20166-1227
                        <PRTPAGE P="35493"/>
                    </P>
                    <P>You must include the DS form number (if applicable), information collection title, and the OMB control number in any correspondence.</P>
                </ADD>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Title of Information Collection:</E>
                     Passport Demand Forecasting Survey.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     1405-0177.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Type of Request:</E>
                     Extension of a Currently Approved Collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Originating Office:</E>
                     Bureau of Consular Affairs, Passport Services Directorate.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Form Number:</E>
                     SV2012-0006.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Respondents:</E>
                     A national representative sample of U.S. citizens, nationals, and any other categories of individuals that are entitled to a U.S. passport product.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Respondents:</E>
                     30,000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Responses:</E>
                     30,000.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Average Time per Response:</E>
                     10 minutes.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Total Estimated Burden Time:</E>
                     5,000 hours.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Frequency:</E>
                     Monthly.
                </P>
                <P>
                    • 
                    <E T="03">Obligation to Respond:</E>
                     Voluntary.
                </P>
                <P>We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department to:</P>
                <P>• Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department.</P>
                <P>• Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.</P>
                <P>• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.</P>
                <P>• Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.</P>
                <FP>Please note that comments submitted in response to this Notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your comments as submitted, including your personal information, will be available for public review.</FP>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Abstract of Proposed Collection</HD>
                <P>The Secretary of State is authorized to issue U.S. passports under 22 U.S.C. 211a. The Department of State, Passport Services administers the U.S. passport issuance program and operates passport agencies and application adjudication centers throughout the United States. As part of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative required the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State to implement a plan to require all U.S. citizen and non-citizen nationals to present a passport and/or other sufficient documentation when entering the U.S. from abroad. This resulted in an increase in demand for U.S. passports.</P>
                <P>The Passport Demand Forecasting Survey requests information from the general public about the demand for U.S. passports, anticipated travel, and the demographic profile of the respondent. This voluntary survey is conducted on a monthly basis using responses from a randomly selected but nationally representative sample of U.S. nationals ages 18 and older. The information obtained from the survey is used to monitor and project the demand for U.S. passport books and U.S. passport cards. The Passport Demand Forecasting Survey aids the Department of State, Passport Services in making decisions about staffing, resource allocation, and budget planning.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Methodology</HD>
                <P>The Passport Demand Forecasting Study uses monthly surveys that will gather data from a national representative sample of U.S. nationals. Survey delivery methodologies can include mail, internet/web, telephone, and mix-mode surveys to ensure the CA/PPT reaches the appropriate audience and leverages the best research method to obtain valid responses. The survey data will cover an estimated 30,000 respondents annually.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <NAME>Zachary Parker,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Director.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12545 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4720-06-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. AB 1295X]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>City of Yelm—Abandonment Exemption—in Thurston and Pierce Counties, Wash.</SUBJECT>
                <P>
                    The City of Yelm (the City) has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F—
                    <E T="03">Exempt Abandonments</E>
                     to abandon an approximately 4.57-mile railroad line that runs between milepost 20.99, near Roy, Wash., and milepost 25.56, in Yelm, Wash. (the Line). The Line traverses U.S. Postal Service Zip Codes 98597 and 98580.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         Although the City initially submitted its verified notice on May 5, 2020, it subsequently submitted several supplements, the last of which was submitted on May 21, 2020. As such, that date will be considered the filing date and the basis for all dates in this notice.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">The City has certified that:</E>
                     (1) No freight traffic has moved over the Line for two years; (2) any overhead freight traffic on the Line can be rerouted over other lines; (3) no formal complaint filed by a user of rail service on the Line (or a State or local government entity acting on behalf of such user) regarding cessation of service over the Line either is pending with the Surface Transportation Board or any U.S. District Court or has been decided in favor of a complainant within the two-year period; and (4) the requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 and 1105.8 (notice of environmental and historic report), 49 CFR 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to government agencies) have been met.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Any railroad employees who may be adversely affected by the proposed abandonment will be protected under 
                    <E T="03">Oregon Short Line Railroad—Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth &amp; Ammon, in Bingham &amp; Bonneville Counties, Idaho,</E>
                     360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To address whether this condition adequately protects affected employees, a petition for partial revocation under 49 U.S.C.10502(d) must be filed.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance (OFA) has been received,
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     the exemption will be effective on July 10, 2020, unless stayed pending reconsideration.
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Petitions to stay that do not involve environmental issues must be filed by June 19, 2020,
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     and formal expressions of intent to file an OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2) and interim trail use/rail banking requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be filed by June 22, 2020.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Petitions to reopen or requests for public use conditions must be filed by June 30, 2020, with the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35494"/>
                    Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20423-0001.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         Persons interested in submitting an OFA must first file a formal expression of intent to file an offer, indicating the type of financial assistance they wish to provide (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         subsidy or purchase) and demonstrating that they are preliminarily financially responsible. 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2)(i).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         The City states in its verified notice that the proposed consummation date of this transaction is May 1, 2020, but this transaction cannot be consummated until July 10, 2020 (50 days from the May 21, 2020 filing date). 
                        <E T="03">See</E>
                         49 CFR 1152.50(d)(2).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         The Board will grant a stay if an informed decision on environmental issues (whether raised by a party or by the Board's office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) cannot be made before the exemption's effective date. 
                        <E T="03">See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines,</E>
                         5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may take appropriate action before the exemption's effective date.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         Filing fees for OFAs and trail use requests can be found at 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25) and (27), respectively.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to the City's representative, Brent Dille, Dille Law, PLLC, 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101, Olympia, WA 98502.</P>
                <P>If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio.</P>
                <P>The City has filed a combined environmental and historic report that addresses the potential effects, if any, of the abandonment on the environment and historic resources. OEA will issue a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) by June 15, 2020. The Draft EA will be available to interested persons on the Board's website, by writing to OEA, or by calling OEA at (202) 245-0305. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Comments on environmental and historic preservation matters must be filed within 15 days after the Draft EA becomes available to the public.</P>
                <P>Environmental, historic preservation, public use, or interim trail use/rail banking conditions will be imposed, where appropriate, in a subsequent decision.</P>
                <P>Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2), the City shall file a notice of consummation with the Board to signify that it has exercised the authority granted and fully abandoned the Line. If consummation has not been effected by the City's filing of a notice of consummation by June 10, 2021, and there are no legal or regulatory barriers to consummation, the authority to abandon will automatically expire.</P>
                <P>
                    Board decisions and notices are available at 
                    <E T="03">www.stb.gov.</E>
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Decided: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <P>By the Board, Allison C. Davis, Director, Office of Proceedings.</P>
                    <NAME>Eden Besera,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Clearance Clerk.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12504 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4915-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD</AGENCY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. EP 748]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Indexing the Annual Operating Revenues of Railroads</SUBJECT>
                <P>The Surface Transportation Board (the Board) is publishing the annual inflation-adjusted index and deflator factors for 2019. The deflator factors are used by the railroads to adjust their gross annual operating revenues for classification purposes. This indexing methodology ensures that railroads are classified based on real business expansion and not on the effects of inflation. Classification is important because it determines the extent to which individual railroads must comply with the Board's reporting requirements.</P>
                <P>The Board's deflator factors are based on the annual average Railroad Freight Price Index developed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Board's deflator factor is used to deflate revenues for comparison with established revenue thresholds.</P>
                <P>
                    The base year for railroads is 1991. The inflation-adjusted indexes and deflator factors are presented as
                    <FTREF/>
                     follows:
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         In 
                        <E T="03">Montana Rail Link, Inc., &amp; Wisconsin Central Ltd., Joint Petition for Rulemaking with Respect to 49 CFR Part 1201,</E>
                         8 I.C.C.2d 625 (1992), the Board's predecessor, the Interstate Commerce Commission, raised the revenue classification level for Class I railroads from $50 million (1978 dollars) to $250 million (1991 dollars), effective for the reporting year beginning January 1, 1992. The Class II threshold was also raised from $10 million (1978 dollars) to $20 million (1991 dollars). On May 14, 2020, the Board opened a rulemaking proceeding and invited comment on issues related to the Class I carrier revenue threshold determination in response to a petition for rulemaking. 
                        <E T="03">Mont. Rail Link, Inc.—Pet. For Rulemaking—Classification of Carriers,</E>
                         EP 763 (STB served May 14, 2020).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="3" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s25,10,10">
                    <TTITLE>Railroad Inflation-Adjusted Index and Deflator Factor Table</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Year</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Index</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Deflator</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1991</ENT>
                        <ENT>409.50</ENT>
                        <ENT>
                            <SU>1</SU>
                             100.00
                        </ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1992</ENT>
                        <ENT>411.80</ENT>
                        <ENT>99.45</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1993</ENT>
                        <ENT>415.50</ENT>
                        <ENT>98.55</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1994</ENT>
                        <ENT>418.80</ENT>
                        <ENT>97.70</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1995</ENT>
                        <ENT>418.17</ENT>
                        <ENT>97.85</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1996</ENT>
                        <ENT>417.46</ENT>
                        <ENT>98.02</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1997</ENT>
                        <ENT>419.67</ENT>
                        <ENT>97.50</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1998</ENT>
                        <ENT>424.54</ENT>
                        <ENT>96.38</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">1999</ENT>
                        <ENT>423.01</ENT>
                        <ENT>96.72</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2000</ENT>
                        <ENT>428.64</ENT>
                        <ENT>95.45</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2001</ENT>
                        <ENT>436.48</ENT>
                        <ENT>93.73</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2002</ENT>
                        <ENT>445.03</ENT>
                        <ENT>91.92</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2003</ENT>
                        <ENT>454.33</ENT>
                        <ENT>90.03</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2004</ENT>
                        <ENT>473.41</ENT>
                        <ENT>86.40</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2005</ENT>
                        <ENT>522.41</ENT>
                        <ENT>78.29</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2006</ENT>
                        <ENT>567.34</ENT>
                        <ENT>72.09</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2007</ENT>
                        <ENT>588.30</ENT>
                        <ENT>69.52</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2008</ENT>
                        <ENT>656.78</ENT>
                        <ENT>62.28</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2009</ENT>
                        <ENT>619.73</ENT>
                        <ENT>66.00</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2010</ENT>
                        <ENT>652.29</ENT>
                        <ENT>62.71</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2011</ENT>
                        <ENT>708.80</ENT>
                        <ENT>57.71</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2012</ENT>
                        <ENT>740.61</ENT>
                        <ENT>55.23</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2013</ENT>
                        <ENT>764.19</ENT>
                        <ENT>53.53</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2014</ENT>
                        <ENT>778.41</ENT>
                        <ENT>52.55</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2015</ENT>
                        <ENT>749.22</ENT>
                        <ENT>54.60</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2016</ENT>
                        <ENT>732.38</ENT>
                        <ENT>55.85</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2017</ENT>
                        <ENT>758.95</ENT>
                        <ENT>53.90</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2018</ENT>
                        <ENT>801.61</ENT>
                        <ENT>51.03</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2019</ENT>
                        <ENT>825.94</ENT>
                        <ENT>49.52</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>Application of the annual deflator factors results in the following annual revenue thresholds:</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="4" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s25,10,11,11">
                    <TTITLE>Railroad Revenue Thresholds</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Year</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Factor</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Class I</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Class II</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2015</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.5460</ENT>
                        <ENT>457,913,998</ENT>
                        <ENT>36,633,120</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2016</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.5585</ENT>
                        <ENT>447,621,226</ENT>
                        <ENT>35,809,698</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2017</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.5390</ENT>
                        <ENT>463,860,933</ENT>
                        <ENT>37,108,875</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2018</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.5103</ENT>
                        <ENT>489,935,956</ENT>
                        <ENT>39,194,876</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">2019</ENT>
                        <ENT>0.4952</ENT>
                        <ENT>504,803,294</ENT>
                        <ENT>40,384,263</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>The inflation-adjusted indexes and deflator factors are effective January 1, 2019.</P>
                </DATES>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Pedro Ramirez at (202) 245-0333. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.</P>
                    <P>
                        Board decisions and notices are available at 
                        <E T="03">www.stb.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                    <SIG>
                        <DATED>Decided: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                        <P>By the Board, Dr. William J. Brennan, Director, Office of Economics.</P>
                        <NAME>Kenyatta Clay,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Clearance Clerk.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12501 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4915-01-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Aviation Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Summary Notice No.—2020-45]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Airlines for America</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35495"/>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket number and must be received on or before June 15, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-0372 using any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal:</E>
                         Go to 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery or Courier:</E>
                         Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Fax:</E>
                         Fax comments to Docket Operations at (202) 493-2251.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Privacy:</E>
                         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 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.dot.gov/privacy.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         Background documents or comments received may be read at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Keira Jones, 202-267-6109, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.</P>
                    <P>This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.</P>
                    <SIG>
                        <DATED>Issued in Washington, DC, on June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                        <NAME>Brandon Roberts,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Petition for Exemption</HD>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket No.:</E>
                         FAA-2020-0372.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Petitioner:</E>
                         Airlines for America.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected:</E>
                         §§ 121.311(g), 121.333(f), 121.391(d), and 121.573(a).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Description of Relief Sought:</E>
                         The petitioner, Airlines for America, Inc. (A4A), on behalf of its member airlines petitions the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an extension of Exemption No. 18522 (Docket No. FAA-2020-0372) until September 30, 2020. This exemption is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2020. The relief granted by Exemption 18522 has been in effect since April 08, 2020.
                    </P>
                    <P>Exemption 18522 provides relief, under certain conditions and limitations, from 14 CFR 121.311(g), 121.333(f), 121.391(d), and 121.573(a) to the extent necessary to allow relief for flight attendants to relocate from the seats they would normally occupy in order to comply with recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concerning proximity to other people. In addition, this relief from certain requirements of the regulation concerning passenger briefings excuses crewmembers from demonstrating the use of oxygen dispensing equipment and donning and inflating a life preserver.</P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12507 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4910-13-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Aviation Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Summary Notice No. FAA-2020-26]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; The Boeing Company</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket number and must be received on or before June 30, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-0131 using any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal:</E>
                         Go to 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery or Courier:</E>
                         Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Fax:</E>
                         Fax comments to Docket Operations at (202) 493-2251.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Privacy:</E>
                         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 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.dot.gov/privacy.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         Background documents or comments received may be read at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>Quentin Flinn (202) 267-3873, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.</P>
                    <P>This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.</P>
                    <SIG>
                        <DATED>Issued in Washington, DC, on June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                        <NAME>Brandon Roberts,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Petition for Exemption</HD>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket No.:</E>
                         FAA-2020-0131.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Petitioner:</E>
                         The Boeing Company.
                        <PRTPAGE P="35496"/>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected:</E>
                         § 91.527(a).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Description of Relief Sought:</E>
                         The Boeing Company (Boeing) petitioned for an exemption on the B777-9, B777-8 “777X” series aircraft from the requirement that “(n)o pilot may take off an airplane that has frost, ice, or snow adhering to any . . . wing . . .” when the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) has determined contamination commensurate with possible anti-icing fluid failure from a vertical orientation of the folding wingtips during treatment and taxi would not adversely affect the performance or controllability of the aircraft. This exemption will allow deicing and anti-icing of the 777X folding wingtip in the folded or extended position, required for Boeing operations under Special Flight Permits during the winter season.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12506 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4910-13-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration</SUBAGY>
                <DEPDOC>[Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0117]</DEPDOC>
                <SUBJECT>60-Day Notice of Renewal for Information Collection: Request for Renewal of Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Skills Testing Delays Annual Survey</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice and request for comments.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>
                        In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR) described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its renewal and invites public comment. This ICR is to collect data on the delays, by State, that applicants face when scheduling a CDL skills test. This information collection and subsequent data analysis is required by section 5506 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, 2015 (FAST Act). FMCSA reported the results of the initial ICR request in a report to congress titled “The Commercial Driver's License Skills Test Delays Report to Congress—CY 2016” available on FMCSA's web page located here: 
                        <E T="03">https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/mission/policy/commercial-drivers-license-skills-test-delays-report-congress-cy-2016</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>We must receive your comments on or before August 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA- 2020-0117 using any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Fax:</E>
                         1-202-493-2251.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Docket Operations; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Hand Delivery or Courier:</E>
                         U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Instructions:</E>
                         All submissions must include the Agency name and docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the exemption process, see the Public Participation heading below. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Docket:</E>
                         For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         and follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets, or go to the street address listed above.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Privacy Act:</E>
                         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 
                        <E T="03">www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
                        <E T="03">www.dot.gov/privacy.</E>
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Public Participation:</E>
                         The Federal eRulemaking Portal is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the “help” section of the Federal eRulemaking Portal website. If you want us to notify you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments online. Comments received after the comment closing date will be included in the docket and will be considered to the extent practicable.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Nicole Michel, Office of Analysis, Research, and Technology/Research Division, Department of Transportation, FMCSA, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 202-366-4354; email 
                        <E T="03">nicole.michel@dot.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Background:</E>
                     Section 5506 of the FAST Act requires FMCSA to produce a study on CDL skills test delays on an annual basis. The requirements of the study are to submit an annual report describing:
                </P>
                <P>“(A) the average wait time from the date an applicant requests to take a skills test to the date the applicant has the opportunity to complete such test;</P>
                <P>(B) the average wait time from the date an applicant, upon failure of a skills test, requests a retest to the date the applicant has the opportunity to complete such retest;</P>
                <P>(C) the actual number of qualified commercial driver's license examiners available to test applicants; and</P>
                <P>(D) the number of testing sites available through the State department of motor vehicles and whether this number has increased or decreased from the previous year.”</P>
                <P>The annual report is also required to describe “specific steps the Administrator is taking to address skills testing delays in States that have average skills test or retest wait times of more than 7 days.” If this information collection does not occur, FMCSA will not be able to continue to conduct the study on CDL skills test delays. This data collection aims to continue to create longitudinal data where currently there is none. If the information collection occurs on a less-than-annual basis, FMCSA will not be able to make observations on yearly trends or analyze differences between States.</P>
                <P>For the initial 2017 survey FMCSA met with several stakeholders, including the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the Commercial Vehicle Training Association, and State Driver Licensing Agencies to ensure the information being collected was not already collected elsewhere and was not available to FMCSA. FMCSA conducted extensive background research to ensure the study was not duplicative. A previous study, done by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2015, asked for similar information but did not produce specific enough data to be used in this study.</P>
                <P>
                    The survey will continue to be sent out via email, with the option for online completion using SurveyMonkey® or Qualtrics. Each State can continue to respond via email or the online survey tool depending on which method is more convenient for the respondent. 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35497"/>
                    The welcome letter will continue to indicate that FMCSA prefers responses via the online survey tool.
                </P>
                <P>The information collected will continue to be published annually in a report to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Request for Renewal of Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Skills Testing Delays Annual Survey.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     2126-0065.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Request:</E>
                     Renewal.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Respondents:</E>
                     State CDL Coordinators (one from each of the 50 States, and one from Washington, DC).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Respondents:</E>
                     51.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Time per Response:</E>
                     2.3 hours (137.5 minutes).
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Expiration Date:</E>
                     February 28, 2019.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Frequency of Response:</E>
                     Annually.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Total Annual Burden:</E>
                     The annual burden is estimated to be no more than 2.3 hours (137.5 minutes) per respondent, which equates to 116.9 hours over the universe of 51 respondents. This estimate contains a maximum of 2 hours to gather information from State information systems, and an estimated maximum of 17.5 minutes to respond to the survey. While States that already track and report similar information may need much less than 2 hours to gather information, discussions with subject matter experts led to an agreement that 2 hours was a reasonable maximum time limit to use to estimate the maximum annual burden expected.
                </P>
                <P>The estimate time for survey completion was calculated using Versta Research's methodology for calculating an estimate of survey length, where each question is given a number of points based on the estimated burden required to respond to the question (for example, simple multiple choice questions are 1 point, whereas short answer questions are 3 points per expected short phrase). The total number of points for all questions is then divided by eight (the number of simple questions a user can respond to online in 1 minute) to determine the estimate required length for finishing the survey.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Public Comments Invited:</E>
                     You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the performance of FMCSA's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information. The Agency will summarize or include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87.</P>
                    <NAME>Kenneth Riddle,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Acting Associate Administrator, Office of Research and Registration.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12567 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Federal Railroad Administration</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Notice of Funding Opportunity for the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO or notice).</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>This notice details the application requirements and procedures to obtain grant funding for eligible projects under the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program (Partnership Program). This notice solicits applications for Partnership Program funds made available by the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (2020 Appropriations Act) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (2019 Appropriations Act). The opportunity described in this notice is made available under Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 20.326, “Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair.”</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Applications for funding under this solicitation are due no later than 5:00 p.m. ET, July 27, 2020. FRA will not consider applications for funding or supplemental material in support of an application received after 5:00 p.m. ET, on July 27, 2020 or incomplete applications for funding. See 
                        <E T="03">Section D</E>
                         of this notice for additional information on the application process.
                    </P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>
                        Applications must be submitted via 
                        <E T="03">www.Grants.gov.</E>
                         Only applicants who comply with all submission requirements described in this notice and submit applications through 
                        <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                         will be eligible for award. For any supporting application materials that an applicant is unable to submit via 
                        <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                         (such as oversized engineering drawings), an applicant may submit an original and two (2) copies to Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, applicants are advised to use other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely receipt of materials before the application deadline.
                    </P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        For further information related to this notice, please contact Mr. Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590; email: 
                        <E T="03">Bryan.Rodda@dot.gov;</E>
                         phone: 202-493-0443, or Ms. Ruthie Americus, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-403, Washington, DC 20590; email: 
                        <E T="03">Ruthie.Americus@dot.gov;</E>
                         phone: 202-493-0431.
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Notice to applicants:</E>
                     FRA recommends that applicants read this notice in its entirety prior to preparing application materials. Definitions of key terms used throughout the NOFO are provided in 
                    <E T="03">Section A(2).</E>
                     These key terms are capitalized throughout the NOFO. There are several administrative and eligibility requirements described herein with which applicants must comply. Additionally, applicants should note that the required Project Narrative component of the application package may not exceed 25 pages in length.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">Table of Contents:</HD>
                <EXTRACT>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">A. Program Description</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">B. Federal Award Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">C. Eligibility Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">D. Application and Submission Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">E. Application Review Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">F. Federal Award Administration Information</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts</FP>
                    <FP SOURCE="FP-2">H. Other Information</FP>
                </EXTRACT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">A. Program Description</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Overview</HD>
                <P>
                    The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for grants for Capital Projects within the United States to repair, replace, or rehabilitate Qualified Railroad Assets to reduce the state of good repair backlog and improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance under the Partnership Program. The Partnership Program provides a Federal funding opportunity to leverage private, state, and local investments to improve significantly American rail infrastructure. The Partnership Program is authorized in Sections 11103 and 11302 of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (Title XI of the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35498"/>
                    Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, Public Law 114-94 (2015)); codified at 49 U.S.C. 24911 and this NOFO is funded by the 2020 Appropriations Act and 2019 Appropriations Act.
                </P>
                <P>DOT recognizes the importance of applying life cycle asset management principles throughout America's infrastructure. It is important for rail infrastructure owners and operators, as well as those who may apply on their behalf, to plan for the maintenance and replacement of assets and the associated costs. In light of recent fatal passenger rail accidents, DOT particularly recognizes the opportunity to enhance safety in both track and equipment through this grant program and encourages the submission of proposed projects to grade-separate or otherwise improve safety at highway-rail grade crossings.</P>
                <P>
                    The Partnership Program is intended to benefit both the Northeast Corridor (“NEC”) and public or Amtrak-owned or controlled infrastructure, equipment, and facilities located in other areas of the country. Applicants should note that the Partnership Program has distinct eligibility requirements based on project location. In addition to the generally applicable requirements, applicants proposing NEC Projects should specifically review the NEC-specific requirements provided in 
                    <E T="03">Section C(3)</E>
                    (b), and the Qualified Railroad Asset information provided in 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                    (a)(vi) while applicants proposing Non-NEC Projects should review the Qualified Railroad Asset information provided in 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                    (a)(v).
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Definitions of Key Terms</HD>
                <P>
                    a. “Benefit-Cost Analysis” (or “Cost-Benefit Analysis”) is a systematic, data-driven, and transparent analysis comparing monetized project benefits and costs, using a no-build baseline and properly discounted present values, including concise documentation of the assumptions and methodology used to produce the analysis, a description of the baseline, data sources used to project outcomes, values of key input parameters, basis of modeling (including spreadsheets, technical memos, etc.), and presentation of the calculations in sufficient detail and transparency to allow the analysis to be reproduced and sensitivity of results evaluated by FRA. Please refer to the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs prior to preparing a BCA at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance.</E>
                     In addition, please also refer to the BCA FAQs on FRA's website for rail-specific examples of how to apply the BCA Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs to Partnership Program applications.
                </P>
                <P>b. “Capital Project” means a project primarily intended to replace, rehabilitate, or repair major infrastructure assets utilized for providing Intercity Passenger Rail service, including tunnels, bridges, stations, and other assets, as determined by the Secretary of Transportation; or a project primarily intended to improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance, including reduced trip times, increased train frequencies, and higher operating speeds, and other improvements, as determined by the Secretary, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(2).</P>
                <P>c. “Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation” means short-haul rail passenger transportation in metropolitan and suburban areas usually having reduced fare, multiple ride, and commuter tickets and morning and evening peak period operations, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24102(3).</P>
                <P>d. “Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation” means rail passenger transportation, except Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(3). In this notice, “Intercity Passenger Rail” is an equivalent term to “Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation.”</P>
                <P>e. “Major Capital Project” means a Capital Project with an estimated total project cost of $300 million or more.</P>
                <P>f. “NEC Project” means a Capital Project where the Qualified Railroad Assets involved in the project are part of, or in primary use for, the Northeast Corridor (“NEC”).</P>
                <P>g. “Non-NEC Project” means a Capital Project where the Qualified Railroad Assets involved in the project are not part of, or are not in primary use for, the Northeast Corridor (“NEC”).</P>
                <P>h. “Northeast Corridor” (“NEC”) means the main rail line between Boston, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia; the branch rail lines connecting to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Springfield, Massachusetts, and Spuyten Duyvil, New York; and facilities and services used to operate and maintain these lines, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(4).</P>
                <P>i. A “Qualified Railroad Asset,” consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5), means infrastructure, equipment, or a facility that:</P>
                <P>i. Is owned or controlled by an eligible applicant;</P>
                <P>ii. is contained in the planning document developed under 49 U.S.C. 24904 and for which a cost-allocation policy has been developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c), or is contained in an equivalent planning document and for which a similar cost-allocation policy has been developed; and</P>
                <P>iii. was not in a State of Good Repair on the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (December 4, 2015).</P>
                <P>
                    See 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                    (a), Project Narrative, for further details about the Qualified Railroad Asset requirements and application submission instructions related to Qualified Railroad Assets.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         For any project that includes purchasing intercity passenger rail equipment, applicants are encouraged to use a standardized approach to the procurement, such as the specifications developed by the Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee or a similarly uniform process.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>j. “State of Good Repair” means a condition in which physical assets, both individually and as a system, are (A) performing at a level at least equal to that called for in their as-built or as-modified design specification during any period when the life cycle cost of maintaining the assets is lower than the cost of replacing them; and (B) sustained through regular maintenance and replacement programs, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24102(12).</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">B. Federal Award Information</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Available Award Amount</HD>
                <P>The total funding available for awards under this NOFO is $291,422,706, which is composed of $198,000,00 made available by the 2020 Appropriations Act and $93,422,706 that remains unawarded from the 2019 Appropriations Act. Should additional Partnership Program funds become available after the release of this NOFO, FRA may elect to award such additional funds to applications received under this NOFO. Any selection and award under this NOFO is subject to the availability of appropriated funds.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Award Size</HD>
                <P>
                    There are no minimum or maximum dollar thresholds for awards. FRA anticipates making multiple awards with the available funding. Given the limited amount of funding currently available, FRA may not be able to award grants to all eligible applications, nor even to all applications that meet or exceed the stated evaluation criteria (see 
                    <E T="03">Section E,</E>
                     Application Review Information). Applicants are encouraged to identify scalable elements such as project components that have operational independence. (See 
                    <E T="03">Section C(3)</E>
                    (c) for more information.)
                </P>
                <P>
                    FRA strongly encourages applicants to identify and include other state, local, public, or private funding or financing to support the proposed project to maximize competitiveness.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35499"/>
                </P>
                <P>Applicants proposing a Major Capital Project are encouraged to identify and describe project phases or elements that could be candidates for subsequent Partnership Program funding, if such funding becomes available. Applications for a Major Capital Project that would seek future funds beyond funding made available in this notice should indicate anticipated annual Federal funding requests from this program for the expected duration of the project. FRA may issue Letters of Intent to Partnership Program grant recipients proposing Major Capital Projects under 49 U.S.C. 24911(g); such Letters of Intent would serve to announce FRA's intention to obligate an amount from future available budget authority toward a grant recipient's future project phases or elements. A Letter of Intent is not an obligation of the Federal government and is subject to the availability of appropriations for Partnership Program grants and subject to Federal laws in force or enacted after the date of the Letter of Intent.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Award Type</HD>
                <P>
                    FRA will make awards for projects selected under this notice through grant agreements and/or cooperative agreements. Grant agreements are used when FRA does not expect to have substantial Federal involvement in carrying out the funded activity. Cooperative agreements allow for substantial Federal involvement in carrying out the agreed upon investment, including technical assistance, review of interim work products, and increased program oversight under 2 CFR 200.24. The term “grant” is used throughout this document and is intended to reference funding awarded through a grant agreement, as well as funding awarded through a cooperative agreement. The funding provided under this NOFO will be made available to grantees on a reimbursable basis. Applicants must certify that their expenditures are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and necessary to the approved project before seeking reimbursement from FRA. Additionally, the grantee is expected to expend matching funds at the required percentage concurrent with Federal funds throughout the life of the project. See an example of standard terms and conditions for FRA grant awards at: 
                    <E T="03">https://railroads.fra.dot.gov/elibrary/award-administration-and-grant-conditions.</E>
                     This template is subject to revision.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">4. Concurrent Applications</HD>
                <P>DOT and FRA may be concurrently soliciting applications for transportation infrastructure projects for several financial assistance programs. Applicants may submit applications requesting funding for a particular project to one or more of these programs. In the application for Partnership Program funding under this NOFO, applicants must indicate the other program(s) to which they submitted or plan to submit an application for funding the entire project or certain project components, as well as highlight new or revised information in the Partnership Program application that differs from the application(s) submitted for other Federal financial assistance programs.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">C. Eligibility Information</HD>
                <P>
                    This section of the notice explains applicant eligibility, cost sharing and matching requirements, project eligibility, and project component operational independence. Applications that do not meet the requirements in this section will be ineligible for funding. Instructions for submitting eligibility information to FRA are detailed in 
                    <E T="03">Section D</E>
                     of this NOFO.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Eligible Applicants</HD>
                <P>The following entities are eligible applicants for all projects permitted under this notice:</P>
                <P>(1) A state (including the District of Columbia);</P>
                <P>(2) a group of states;</P>
                <P>(3) an Interstate Compact;</P>
                <P>
                    (4) a public agency or publicly chartered authority established by one or more states; 
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         See Section D(2)(a)(iv) for supporting documentation required to demonstrate eligibility under this eligibility category.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>(5) a political subdivision of a state;</P>
                <P>(6) Amtrak, acting on its own behalf or under a cooperative agreement with one or more states; or</P>
                <P>(7) any combination of the entities described in (1) through (6).</P>
                <P>
                    Applications must identify a lead applicant. The lead applicant serves as the primary point of contact for the application, and if selected, as the recipient of the Partnership Program grant award. To submit a joint application, the lead applicant must identify the joint applicant(s) and include a signed statement from an authorized representative of each joint applicant entity that affirms the entity joins the application. See 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                     for further instructions about submitting a joint application.
                </P>
                <P>
                    An application submitted by Amtrak and one or more states whether eligible under (1), (2) or (6) above, must identify the lead applicant and include a signed cooperative agreement between Amtrak and the state(s) consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(1)(F). Selection preference will be provided for joint applications, as further discussed in 
                    <E T="03">Section E(1)</E>
                    (c). Applications may reference entities that are not eligible applicants (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     private sector firms) in an application as a project partner. However, FRA will provide selection preference to joint applications submitted by multiple eligible applicants.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Cost Sharing or Matching</HD>
                <P>
                    The Federal share of total costs for a project funded under the Partnership Program shall not exceed 80 percent, though FRA will provide selection preference to applications where the proposed Federal share of total project costs is 50 percent or less. The estimated total cost of a project must be based on the best available information, including engineering studies, studies of economic feasibility, environmental analyses, and information on the expected use of equipment and facilities. The minimum 20 percent non-Federal share may be comprised of public sector (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     state or local) or private sector funding. FRA will not consider any Federal financial assistance 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     or any non-Federal funds already expended (or otherwise encumbered) toward the matching requirement, unless compliant with 2 CFR part 200.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         See Section D(2)(a)(iii) for supporting information required to demonstrate eligibility of Federal funds for use as match.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    FRA will give preference to applications proposing cash contributions for the required 20 percent of the non-Federal share. Eligible in-kind contributions may also be accepted for any non-Federal matching beyond the required 20 percent. In-kind contributions, including the donation of services, materials, and equipment, may be credited as a project cost, in a uniform manner consistent with 2 CFR 200.306. Moreover, FRA encourages applicants to broaden their funding table in applications. FRA will give preference to applications proposing a non-Federal share exceeding the required 20 percent, providing the required 20 percent non-Federal share as a cash contribution, and consisting of funding from multiple sources that demonstrate broad participation and cost sharing from affected stakeholders. If Amtrak is an applicant, Amtrak may use its ticket and other non-Federal revenues generated from its operations and other sources to satisfy the non-Federal share 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35500"/>
                    requirements. Applicants must identify the source(s) of their matching and other funds and must clearly and distinctly reflect these funds as part of the total project cost.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Before applying, applicants should carefully review the principles for cost sharing or matching in 2 CFR 200.306. FRA will only approve pre-award costs consistent with 2 CFR 200.458. See 
                    <E T="03">Section D(6).</E>
                     Cost sharing or matching may be used only for authorized Federal award purposes. Additionally, in preparing estimates of total project costs, applicants should refer to FRA's cost estimate guidance, “Capital Cost Estimating: Guidance for Project Sponsors,” which is available at: 
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0926.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Other</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">a. Project Eligibility</HD>
                <P>Projects eligible for Partnership Program funds include Capital Projects within the United States to replace or rehabilitate Qualified Railroad Assets and improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance, including:</P>
                <P>(1) Capital Projects to replace existing assets in-kind;</P>
                <P>(2) Capital Projects to replace existing assets with assets that increase capacity or provide a higher level of service;</P>
                <P>(3) Capital Projects to ensure that service can be maintained while existing assets are brought to a State of Good Repair; and</P>
                <P>(4) Capital Projects to bring existing assets into a State of Good Repair.</P>
                <P>
                    Qualified Railroad Assets, as further defined in 
                    <E T="03">Section A(2),</E>
                     are owned or controlled by an eligible applicant and may include: Infrastructure, including track, ballast, switches and interlockings, bridges, communication and signal systems, power systems, highway-rail grade crossings, and other railroad infrastructure and support systems used in intercity passenger rail service; stations, including station buildings, support systems, signage, and track and platform areas; equipment, including passenger cars, locomotives, and maintenance-of-way equipment; and facilities, including yards and terminal areas and maintenance shops.
                </P>
                <P>
                    Capital Projects, as further defined in 
                    <E T="03">Section A(2),</E>
                     may include final design; however, final design costs will only be eligible in conjunction with an award for project construction. Environmental and related clearances, including all work necessary for FRA to approve the project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related statutes and regulations are not eligible for funding under this notice. (See 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                    (a)(ix) for additional information.) Eligible projects with completed environmental and engineering documents indicate strong project readiness.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">b. Additional Eligibility Requirements for NEC Projects</HD>
                <P>This section provides additional eligibility requirements for NEC Projects. Applicants proposing Non-NEC Projects are not subject to the requirements in this section and may proceed to Section C(3)(c).</P>
                <P>In the Partnership Program, grant funds may not be provided to an eligible recipient for an eligible NEC Project unless Amtrak and the public authorities providing commuter rail passenger transportation at the eligible project location on the NEC are in compliance with 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2). Applicants must demonstrate compliance with 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2) by describing the status of compliance with such cost-allocation policy between Amtrak and the public authorities providing commuter rail passenger transportation at the eligible project location, which may include demonstrating that such authorities are excepted from allocating costs for the proposed NEC Project, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(1)(A)(ii). Such providers must maintain compliance with 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2) for the duration of the project.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">c. Project Component Operational Independence</HD>
                <P>
                    If an applicant requests funding for a project that is a component or set of components of a larger project, the project component(s) must be attainable with the award amount and comply with all eligibility requirements described in 
                    <E T="03">Section C.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    In addition, the component(s) must enable independent analysis and decision making, as determined by FRA under NEPA (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     have independent utility, connect logical termini, and do not restrict the consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable rail projects). Components must have independent utility for use in the BCA.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">D. Application and Submission Information</HD>
                <P>
                    Required documents for the application are outlined in the following paragraphs. Applicants must complete and submit all components of the application. See 
                    <E T="03">Section D(2)</E>
                     for the application checklist. FRA welcomes the submission of additional relevant supporting documentation, such as planning, engineering and design documentation, and letters of support from partnering organizations that will not count against the Project Narrative page limit.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Address To Request Application Package</HD>
                <P>
                    Applicants must submit all application materials in their entirety through 
                    <E T="03">http://www.Grants.gov</E>
                     no later than 5:00 p.m. ET, on July 27, 2020. Applicants are strongly encouraged to apply early to ensure that all materials are received before the application deadline. FRA reserves the right to modify this deadline. General information for submitting applications through 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     can be found at: 
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0270.</E>
                     FRA is committed to ensuring that information is available in appropriate alternative formats to meet the requirements of persons who have a disability. If you require an alternative version of files provided, please contact Mr. Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration,1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590; email: 
                    <E T="03">bryan.rodda@dot.gov.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Content and Form of Application Submission</HD>
                <P>
                    FRA strongly advises applicants to read this section carefully. Applicants must submit all required information and components of the application package to be considered for funding. Additionally, applicants selected to receive funding must satisfy the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 22905 explained in part at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/page/P0185.</E>
                </P>
                <P>Required documents for an application package are outlined in the checklist below.</P>
                <P>• Project Narrative (see D.2.a).</P>
                <P>• Statement of Work (see D.2.b.i).</P>
                <P>• Benefit-Cost Analysis (see D.2.b.ii).</P>
                <P>• Environmental Compliance Documentation (see D.2.b.iii).</P>
                <P>• SF424—Application for Federal Assistance.</P>
                <P>• SF 424C—Budget Information for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any construction costs, or SF 424A—Budget Information for Non-Construction.</P>
                <P>• SF 424D—Assurances for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any construction costs, or SF 424B—Assurances for Non-Construction.</P>
                <P>• FRA's Additional Assurances and Certifications.</P>
                <P>
                    • SF LLL—Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35501"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">a. Project Narrative</HD>
                <P>This section describes the minimum content required in the Project Narrative of grant applications. The Project Narrative must follow the basic outline below to address the program requirements and assist evaluators in locating relevant information.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="2" OPTS="L2,tp0,p1,8/9,i1" CDEF="s75,xs54">
                    <TTITLE> </TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1"> </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1"> </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">I. Cover Page</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.i.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">II. Project Summary</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.ii.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">III. Project Funding</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.iii.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">IV. Applicant Eligibility Criteria</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.iv.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">V. Non-NEC Project Eligibility Criteria</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.v.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">VI. NEC Project Eligibility Criteria</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.vi.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">VII. Detailed Project Description</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.vii.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">VIII. Project Location</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.viii.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">IX. Grade Crossing Information, if applicable</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.ix.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">X. Evaluation and Selection Criteria</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.x.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">XI. Project Implementation and Management</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.xi.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">XII. Environmental Readiness</ENT>
                        <ENT>See D.2.a.xii.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>The above content must be provided in a narrative statement submitted by the applicant. The Project Narrative may not exceed 25 pages in length (excluding cover pages, table of contents, and supporting documentation). FRA will not review or consider for award applications with Project Narratives exceeding the 25-page limitation. If possible, applicants should submit supporting documents via website links rather than hard copies. If supporting documents are submitted, applicants must clearly identify the relevant portion of the supporting document with the page numbers of the cited information in the Project Narrative. The Project Narrative must adhere to the following outline.</P>
                <P>
                    i. 
                    <E T="03">Cover Page:</E>
                     Include a cover page that lists the following elements in either a table or formatted list:
                </P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="2" OPTS="L2,tp0,i1" CDEF="s100,xs54">
                    <TTITLE> </TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Project Title</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1"> </CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Lead Applicant Organization Name</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Joint Applicant(s) Organization Name(s), if any</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Amount of Federal Funding Requested Under this NOFO</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Proposed Non-Federal Match</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Total Project Cost</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Was a Federal Grant Application Previously Submitted for this Project?</ENT>
                        <ENT>Yes/No.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">If Yes, State the Name of the Federal Grant Program and Title of the Project in the Previous Application</ENT>
                        <ENT>Federal Grant Program:</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">City(-ies), State(s) Where the Project is Located</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Congressional District(s) Where the Project is Located</ENT>
                        <ENT/>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <P>
                    ii. 
                    <E T="03">Project Summary:</E>
                     Provide a brief 4-6 sentence summary of the proposed project and what the project will entail. Include challenges the proposed project aims to address, and summarize the intended outcomes and anticipated benefits that will result from the proposed project.
                </P>
                <P>
                    iii. 
                    <E T="03">Project Funding:</E>
                     Indicate the amount of Federal funding requested, the proposed non-Federal match, and total project cost. Identify the source(s) of matching and other funds, and clearly and distinctly reflect these funds as part of the total project cost in the application budget. If federal funding is proposed as match, demonstrate the applicant's determination of eligibility for such use, and the legal basis for that determination. Also, note if the requested Federal funding under this NOFO or other programs must be obligated or spent by a certain date due to dependencies or relationships with other Federal or non-Federal funding sources, related projects, law, or other factors. If applicable, provide the type and estimated value of any proposed contributions, as well as substantiate how the contributions meet the requirements in 2 CFR 200.306. For a Major Capital Project that would seek future funds beyond funding made available in this notice, provide the anticipated annual Federal funding requests from this grant program for the expected duration of the project. Finally, specify whether Federal funding for the project has previously been sought, and identify the Federal program and fiscal year of the funding request(s), as well as highlight new or revised information in the Partnership Program application that differs from the application(s) to other financial assistance programs.
                </P>
                <P>
                    iv. 
                    <E T="03">Applicant Eligibility Criteria:</E>
                     Explain how the lead applicant and joint applicant(s) meet the applicant eligibility criteria outlined in 
                    <E T="03">Section C</E>
                     of this notice, including references to creation or enabling legislation for public agencies and publicly chartered authorities established by one or more states. To submit a joint application, the lead applicant must identify the joint applicant(s) and include a signed statement from an authorized representative of each joint applicant entity that affirms the entity joins the application. For joint applications involving Amtrak and one or more states, Amtrak and the state(s) must provide a cooperative agreement for the project signed by authorized representatives of Amtrak and each state. Joint applications are expected to include a description of the roles and responsibilities of each applicant, including budget and subrecipient information showing how the applicants will share project costs.
                </P>
                <P>
                    v. 
                    <E T="03">Non-NEC Project Eligibility Criteria:</E>
                     This section provides project eligibility requirements for Non-NEC Projects. Applicants proposing NEC Projects may skip this section and proceed to section D(2)(a)(vi). For Non-NEC Projects, demonstrate that the proposed project is a Capital Project that meets the project eligibility criteria in 
                    <E T="03">Section C(3)</E>
                     of this notice. Further, demonstrate that the infrastructure, equipment and/or facilities involved in the proposed project are Qualified Railroad Assets under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5), as follows:
                </P>
                <P>(A) To demonstrate ownership or control by an eligible applicant under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(A), show either:</P>
                <P>(1) The lead or joint applicant owns or will, at project completion, have ownership of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project; or</P>
                <P>(2) The lead or joint applicant controls or will, at project completion, have control over the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project including by agreement with the infrastructure, equipment, or facility owner(s). Applicants should describe such agreement(s) in sufficient detail in their application for FRA to understand the extent of the control, including the lead or joint applicant's management and decision-making authority regarding the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project, and the remaining or anticipated duration of the agreement(s). Agreements involving railroad rights-of-way should also demonstrate the lead or joint applicant has train dispatching and maintenance-of-way responsibilities for the right-of-way.</P>
                <P>(B) To demonstrate the requirements under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), show that the infrastructure, equipment, or facilities involved in the proposed project are contained in a planning document equivalent to the planning document developed under 49 U.S.C. 24904 and for which a similar cost-allocation policy to the cost-allocation policy developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c) has been developed.</P>
                <P>
                    Non-NEC Projects may satisfy the equivalent planning document requirement by demonstrating the project is contained in the planning 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35502"/>
                    document(s) prepared under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 227, “State Rail Plans,” for the state(s) where the infrastructure, equipment and facilities are located or in primary use. Applicants with projects contained in a State Rail Plan should indicate the location (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     table or page number) where the project is discussed in the document. If a project is not contained in the State Rail Plan, applicants may demonstrate the infrastructure, equipment and facilities involved in the proposed project are contained in an equivalent planning document or amend the relevant State Rail Plan(s) to contain the project. Amending a State Rail Plan requires a letter to FRA from an authorized representative of the relevant state rail transportation authority adding the proposed project to the plan and stating that the letter serves as an addendum to the current plan. Such a letter should include the project name, a brief description of the project, and estimated project cost and Federal and non-Federal share by funding source. FRA encourages state rail transportation authorities to make any such addendum letters publicly available with their State Rail Plans. FRA recommends such letters be submitted as part of an applicant's Partnership Program application via 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    . Whether submitted as part of a Partnership Program application package or separately to FRA, FRA must receive the letter by the application due date of this notice.
                </P>
                <P>Non-NEC Projects must satisfy the similar cost-allocation policy requirement either by demonstrating the infrastructure, equipment or facilities involved in the proposed project are for routes subject to the cost-allocation policy adopted under Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), Public Law 110-432, Oct. 16, 2008; or by demonstrating the infrastructure, equipment or facilities involved in the proposed project are subject to a similar cost-allocation policy.</P>
                <P>(C) To demonstrate the state of good repair requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B):</P>
                <P>(1) Describe the condition and performance of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility as of the time of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (Dec. 4, 2015);</P>
                <P>
                    (2) indicate how the infrastructure, equipment, or facility's condition or performance falls short of the definition of “State of Good Repair” in 
                    <E T="03">Section A(2);</E>
                     and
                </P>
                <P>(3) indicate, if known, when the infrastructure, equipment, or facility last received comprehensive repair, replacement, or rehabilitation work similar to the applicant's proposed scope of work.</P>
                <P>
                    vi. 
                    <E T="03">NEC Project Eligibility Criteria:</E>
                     This section provides project eligibility requirements for NEC Projects. (Applicants proposing Non-NEC Projects may skip this section and proceed to 
                    <E T="03">Section D</E>
                    (2)(a)(vii).) For NEC Projects, demonstrate that the proposed project is a Capital Project that meets the project eligibility criteria in 
                    <E T="03">Section C(3)</E>
                     of this notice including the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 24911(e). Further, demonstrate that the infrastructure, equipment, and/or facilities involved in the project are Qualified Railroad Assets under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5), as follows:
                </P>
                <P>(A) To demonstrate ownership or control by an eligible applicant under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(A), show either:</P>
                <P>(1) The lead or joint applicant owns or will, at project completion, have ownership of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project; or</P>
                <P>(2) The lead or joint applicant controls or will, at project completion, have control over the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project including by agreement with the infrastructure, equipment, or facility owner(s). Applicants should describe such agreement(s) in sufficient detail in their application for FRA to understand the extent of the control, including the lead or joint applicant's management and decision-making authority regarding the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project, and the remaining or anticipated duration of the agreement(s). Agreements involving railroad rights-of-way should also demonstrate the lead or joint applicant has train dispatching and maintenance-of-way responsibilities for the right-of-way.</P>
                <P>(B) To demonstrate the requirements under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), show that the infrastructure, equipment, or facilities involved in the proposed project are contained in the planning document developed under 49 U.S.C. 24904 and for which a cost-allocation policy has been developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c), or are contained in an equivalent planning document and for which a similar cost-allocation policy has been developed.</P>
                <P>
                    NEC Projects must satisfy the planning document requirement by demonstrating the project is contained in the current approved planning document developed under 49 U.S.C. 24904 (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     the NEC Commission Five-Year Capital Investment Plan). Applicants with projects contained this plan should indicate the location (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     table or page number) where the project in discussed in the document. If an NEC Project is not contained in the 49 U.S.C. 24904 planning document at the time of this notice, applicants may demonstrate that the infrastructure, equipment and facilities involved in the proposed project are contained in an equivalent planning document or update the 49 U.S.C. 24904 planning document to contain the project by the due date for applications under this notice. An equivalent planning document may include a planning document developed under 49 U.S.C. 24320(c).
                </P>
                <P>
                    NEC Projects must satisfy the cost-allocation policy requirement by demonstrating the infrastructure, equipment, or facilities are subject to the cost-allocation policy developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c) (
                    <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                     Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy), or a similar cost-allocation policy.
                </P>
                <P>(C) To demonstrate the state of good repair requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(C), the NEC applicant must:</P>
                <P>(1) Describe the condition and performance of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility as of the time of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (Dec. 4, 2015);</P>
                <P>
                    (2) indicate how the infrastructure, equipment, or facility's condition or performance falls short of the definition of “State of Good Repair” in 
                    <E T="03">Section A(2);</E>
                     and
                </P>
                <P>(3) indicate, if known, when the infrastructure, equipment, or facility last received comprehensive repair, replacement, or rehabilitation work similar to the applicant's proposed scope of work.</P>
                <P>
                    vii. 
                    <E T="03">Detailed Project Description:</E>
                     Include a detailed project description that expands upon the brief summary required above. This detailed description must provide, at a minimum: Additional background on the challenges the project aims to address; the expected users and beneficiaries of the project, including all railroad operators; the specific components and elements of the project; and any other information the applicant deems necessary to justify the proposed project. Consistent with DOT's R.O.U.T.E.S. Initiative (
                    <E T="03">https://www.transportation.gov/rural</E>
                    ), DOT encourages applicants to describe how activities proposed in their application would address the unique challenges facing rural transportation networks, regardless of the geographic location of those activities. Applicants with Major Capital Projects are encouraged to identify and describe project phases or 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35503"/>
                    elements that would be candidates for subsequent Partnership Program funding if such funding becomes available. Include information to demonstrate the project is reasonably expected to begin construction in a timely manner. For all projects, applicants must provide information about proposed performance measures, as described in 
                    <E T="03">Section F(3)</E>
                    (c) and required in 2 CFR 200.301.
                </P>
                <P>
                    viii. 
                    <E T="03">Project Location:</E>
                     Include geospatial data for the project, as well as a map of the project's location. Include the Congressional districts in which the project will take place.
                </P>
                <P>
                    ix. 
                    <E T="03">Grade Crossing Information, if applicable:</E>
                     For any project that includes grade crossing components, cite specific DOT National Grade Crossing Inventory information, including the railroad that owns the infrastructure (or the crossing owner, if different from the railroad), the primary railroad operator, the DOT crossing inventory number, and the roadway at the crossing. Applicants can search for data to meet this requirement at the following link: 
                    <E T="03">http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/default.aspx.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    x. 
                    <E T="03">Evaluation and Selection Criteria:</E>
                     Include a thorough discussion of how the proposed project meets all of the evaluation and selection criteria, as outlined in 
                    <E T="03">Section E</E>
                     of this notice. If an application does not sufficiently address the evaluation criteria and the selection criteria, it is unlikely to be a competitive application.
                </P>
                <P>
                    xi. 
                    <E T="03">Project Implementation and Management:</E>
                     Describe proposed project implementation and project management arrangements including as between the lead and joint applicants. Include descriptions of the expected arrangements for project contracting, contract oversight, change-order management, risk management, and conformance to Federal requirements for project progress reporting. Describe past experience in managing and overseeing similar projects. For Major Capital Projects, explain plans for a rigorous project management and oversight approach.
                </P>
                <P>
                    xii. 
                    <E T="03">Environmental Readiness:</E>
                     If the NEPA process is complete, indicate the date of completion, and provide a website link or other reference to the final Categorical Exclusion determination, Finding of No Significant Impact, or Record of Decision, as well as any other NEPA documents prepared. If the NEPA process is not complete, the application should detail the type of NEPA review underway, if applicable, where the project is in the process, and indicate the anticipated date of completion of all NEPA-related milestones and of the final NEPA determination. If the last agency action with respect to NEPA documents occurred more than three years before the application date, the applicant should describe why the project has been delayed and why NEPA documents have not been updated and include a proposed approach for verifying and, if necessary, updating this material in accordance with applicable NEPA requirements. Additional information regarding FRA's environmental processes and requirements are located at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/environment.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">b. Additional Application Elements</HD>
                <P>Applicants must submit:</P>
                <P>
                    i. A Statement of Work (SOW) addressing the scope, schedule, and budget for the proposed project if it were selected for award. The SOW must contain sufficient detail so FRA, and the applicant, can understand the expected outcomes of the proposed work to be performed and can monitor progress toward completing project tasks and deliverables during a prospective grant's period of performance. Applicants must use FRA's standard SOW, schedule, and budget templates to be considered for award. The templates are located at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0325.</E>
                </P>
                <P>When preparing the budget, the total cost of a project must be based on the best available information as indicated in cited references that include engineering studies, economic feasibility studies, environmental analyses, and information on the expected use of equipment or facilities. For Major Capital Projects, the SOW must include annual budget estimates and anticipated Federal funding for the expected duration of the project.</P>
                <P>ii. A Benefit-Cost Analysis consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(d)(2)(A) that demonstrates the merit of investing in the proposed project. The BCA should include anticipated private and public benefits relative to the costs of the proposed project, including:</P>
                <P>i. Effects on system and service performance;</P>
                <P>ii. effects on safety, competitiveness, reliability, trip or transit time, and resilience;</P>
                <P>iii. efficiencies from improved integration with other modes; and</P>
                <P>iv. ability to meet existing or anticipated demand.</P>
                <P>
                    The BCA should be systematic, data driven, and examine the trade-offs between reasonably expected project costs and benefits. Applicants are encouraged to include quantifiable railroad data related to the Qualified Railroad Assets involved in the project, such as information on delay, failure or safety incidents, passengers carried (
                    <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                     ridership), daily train movements, or similar metrics. The complexity and level of detail in the Benefit-Cost Analysis prepared for the Partnership Program should reflect the scope and scale of the proposed project. Please refer to the Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs prior to preparing a BCA at 
                    <E T="03">https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance.</E>
                     In addition, please also refer to the BCA FAQs on FRA's website (
                    <E T="03">https://www.fra.dot.gov/grants</E>
                    ) for some rail-specific examples of how to apply the Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs to Partnership applications.
                </P>
                <P>iii. Environmental compliance documentation, if a website link is not cited in the Project Narrative.</P>
                <P>iv. SF 424—Application for Federal Assistance.</P>
                <P>v. SF 424C—Budget Information for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any other construction elements, the SF 424A—Budget Information for Non-Construction.</P>
                <P>vi. SF 424D—Assurances for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any other construction elements, the SF 424B—Assurances for Non-Construction.</P>
                <P>vii. FRA's Additional Assurances and Certifications.</P>
                <P>viii. An SF LLL—Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.</P>
                <P>ix. A statement that the lead applicant has a system for procuring property and services under a Federal award under this NOFO that supports the provisions in 2 CFR 200 Subpart D-Procurement Standards at 2 CFR 200.317-326 and 2 CFR 1201.317.</P>
                <P>x. A statement indicating whether the applicant or any of its principals:</P>
                <P>a. Is presently suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or disqualified;</P>
                <P>b. has been convicted within the preceding 3 years of any of the offenses listed in 2 CFR 180.800(a); or had a civil judgment rendered against the organization or the individual for one of those offenses within that time period;</P>
                <P>c. is presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, state or local) with, commission of any of the offenses listed in 2 CFR 180.800(a); or</P>
                <P>
                    d. has had one or more public transactions (Federal, state, or local) terminated within the preceding 3 years for cause or default (including material failure to comply).
                    <PRTPAGE P="35504"/>
                </P>
                <P>
                    Forms needed for the electronic application process are at 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                    .
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">c. Post-Selection Requirements</HD>
                <P>
                    See 
                    <E T="03">Section F(2)</E>
                     of this notice for post-selection requirements.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Unique Entity Identifier, System for Award Management (SAM), and Submission Instructions</HD>
                <P>
                    To apply for funding through 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    , applicants must be properly registered in SAM before submitting an application, provide a valid unique entity identifier in its application, and continue to maintain an active SAM registration all as described in detail below. Complete instructions on how to register and submit an application can be found at 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                    . Registering with 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     is a one-time process; however, it can take up to several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. FRA recommends that applicants start the registration process as early as possible to prevent delays that may preclude submitting an application package by the application deadline. Applications will not be accepted after the due date. Delayed registration is not an acceptable justification for an application extension.
                </P>
                <P>
                    FRA may not make a grant award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) and SAM requirements and if an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time the Federal awarding agency is ready to make a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a Federal award to another applicant. (Please note that if a Dun &amp; Bradstreet DUNS number must be obtained or renewed, this may take a significant amount of time to complete.) Late applications that are the result of a failure to register or comply with 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     applicant requirements in a timely manner will not be considered. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the submission deadline, the application will not be considered. To submit an application through 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    , applicants must:
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">a. Obtain a DUNS Number</HD>
                <P>
                    A DUNS number is required for 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     registration. The Office of Management and Budget requires that all businesses and nonprofit applicants for Federal funds include a DUNS number in their applications for a new award or renewal of an existing award. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for the government in identifying and keeping track of entities receiving Federal funds. The identifier is used for tracking purposes and to validate address and point of contact information for Federal assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. The DUNS number will be used throughout the grant life cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Applicants may obtain a DUNS number by calling 1-866-705-5711 or by applying online at 
                    <E T="03">http://www.dnb.com/us.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">
                    b. Register With the SAM at 
                    <E T="03">www.SAM.gov</E>
                </HD>
                <P>
                    All applicants for Federal financial assistance must maintain current registrations in the SAM database. An applicant must be registered in SAM to successfully register in 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    . The SAM database is the repository for standard information about Federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. Organizations that have previously submitted applications via 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     are already registered with SAM, as it is a requirement for 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     registration. Please note, however, that applicants must update or renew their SAM registration at least once per year to maintain an active status. Therefore, it is critical to check registration status well in advance of the application deadline. If an applicant is selected for an award, the applicant must maintain an active SAM registration with current information throughout the period of the award. Information about SAM registration procedures is available at 
                    <E T="03">www.sam.gov.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">
                    c. Create a 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     Username and Password
                </HD>
                <P>
                    Applicants must complete an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) profile on 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                     and create a username and password. Applicants must use the organization's DUNS number to complete this step. Additional information about the registration process is available at: 
                    <E T="03">https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration.html.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">d. Acquire Authorization for Your AOR From the E-Business Point of Contact (E-Biz POC)</HD>
                <P>
                    The E-Biz POC at the applicant's organization must respond to the registration email from 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     and login at 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                     to authorize the applicant as the AOR. Please note there can be more than one AOR for an organization.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">e. Submit an Application Addressing All Requirements Outlined in This NOFO</HD>
                <P>
                    If an applicant experiences difficulties at any point during this process, please call the 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     Customer Center Hotline at 1-800-518-4726, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (closed on Federal holidays). For information and instructions on each of these processes, please see instructions at: 
                    <E T="03">http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.</E>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">4. Submission Dates and Times</HD>
                <P>
                    Applicants must submit complete applications to 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                     no later than 5:00 p.m. ET, July 27, 2020. Applicants will receive a system-generated acknowledgement of receipt. FRA reviews 
                    <E T="03">www.Grants.gov</E>
                     information on dates/times of applications submitted to determine timeliness of submissions. Delayed registration is not an acceptable reason for late submission. To apply for funding under this announcement, all applicants are expected to be registered as an organization with 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    . Applicants are strongly encouraged to apply early to ensure all materials are received before this deadline.
                </P>
                <P>
                    To ensure a fair competition of limited discretionary funds, the following conditions are not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) Failure to complete the 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     registration process before the deadline; (2) failure to follow 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                     instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its website; (3) failure to follow all the instructions in this NOFO; and (4) technical issues experienced with the applicant's computer or information technology environment.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">5. Intergovernmental Review</HD>
                <P>Executive Order 12372 requires applicants from state and local units of government or other organizations providing services within a state to submit a copy of the application to the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC), if one exists, and if this program has been selected for review by the state. Intergovernmental Review is not required for this program. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to determine if the program has been selected for state review.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">6. Funding Restrictions</HD>
                <P>
                    FRA will not fund any preliminary engineering, environmental work, or 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35505"/>
                    related clearances under this NOFO. FRA will only consider funding a project's final design activities if the applicant is also seeking funding for construction activities. FRA will only approve pre-award costs if such costs are incurred pursuant to the negotiation and in anticipation of the grant agreement and if such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work consistent with 2 CFR 200.458. Under 2 CFR 200.458, grant recipients must seek written approval from FRA for pre-award activities to be eligible for reimbursement under the grant. Activities initiated prior to the execution of a grant or without FRA's written approval may be ineligible for reimbursement or matching contribution.
                </P>
                <P>
                    FRA is prohibited under 49 U.S.C. 22905(f) 
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     from providing Partnership Program grants for Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation. FRA's interpretation of this provision is informed by the language in 49 U.S.C. 24911, and specifically the definitions of capital project in 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(2)(A) and (B). FRA's primary intent in funding Partnership Program projects is to make reasonable investments in Capital Projects used in Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation. Such projects may be located on shared corridors where Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation also benefits from the project.
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         Under 49 U.S.C. 24911(i), Partnership grants are subject to the conditions in 49 U.S.C. 22905.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">7. Other Submission Requirements</HD>
                <P>
                    For any supporting application materials that an applicant cannot submit via 
                    <E T="03">Grants.gov</E>
                    , such as oversized engineering drawings, an applicant may submit an original and two (2) copies to Mr. Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, FRA advises applicants to use other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely receipt of materials before the application deadline. Additionally, if documents can be obtained online, explaining to FRA how to access files on a referenced website may also be sufficient. 
                    <E T="03">Note:</E>
                     Please use generally accepted formats such as .pdf, .doc, .docx, .xls, .xlsx and .ppt, when uploading attachments. While applicants may embed picture files, such as .jpg, .gif, and .bmp, in document files, applicants should not submit attachments in these formats. Additionally, the following formats will not be accepted: .com, .bat, .exe, .vbs, .cfg, .dat, .db, .dbf, .dll, .ini, .log, .ora, .sys, and .zip.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">E. Application Review Information</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Criteria</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">a. Eligibility, Completeness, and Applicant Risk Review</HD>
                <P>
                    FRA will first screen each application for applicant and project eligibility (eligibility requirements are outlined in 
                    <E T="03">Section C</E>
                     of this notice), completeness (application documentation and submission requirements are outlined in 
                    <E T="03">Section D</E>
                     of this notice), applicant risk and the 20 percent minimum non-Federal match in determining whether the application is eligible.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">b. Evaluation Criteria</HD>
                <P>FRA will evaluate all eligible and complete applications against the following evaluation criteria:</P>
                <P>i. Technical Merit: FRA will to take into account—</P>
                <P>(A) The degree to which the tasks and subtasks outlined in the SOW are appropriate to achieve the expected outcomes of the proposed project;</P>
                <P>(B) The technical qualifications and demonstrated experience of key personnel proposed to lead and perform the technical efforts, and the qualifications of the primary and supporting organizations to fully and successfully execute the proposed project within the proposed timeframe and budget;</P>
                <P>(C) The degree to which the proposed project's business plan considers potential private sector participation in the financing, construction, or operation of the proposed project;</P>
                <P>(D) Whether the applicant has, or will have, the legal, financial, and technical capacity to carry out the project; satisfactory continuing control over the use of the equipment or facilities; and the capability and willingness to maintain the equipment or facilities;</P>
                <P>(E) The applicant's past performance in developing and delivering similar projects, and previous financial contributions;</P>
                <P>(F) Whether the project has completed necessary pre-construction activities and indicates strong project readiness; and</P>
                <P>(G) Whether the project is consistent with planning guidance and documents set forth by the Secretary of Transportation or required by law.</P>
                <P>
                    ii. 
                    <E T="03">Project Benefits:</E>
                     FRA will take into account the benefit-cost analysis of the proposed project, including anticipated private and public benefits relative to the costs of the proposed project including—
                </P>
                <P>(A) Effects on system and service performance;</P>
                <P>(B) Effects on safety, competitiveness, reliability, trip or transit time, and resilience;</P>
                <P>(C) Efficiencies from improved integration with other modes; and</P>
                <P>(D) Ability to meet existing or anticipated demand.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">c. Selection Criteria</HD>
                <P>In addition to the eligibility and completeness review and the evaluation criteria outlined in this section, FRA will apply the selection criteria:</P>
                <P>i. FRA will give preference to eligible projects for which:</P>
                <P>(A) Amtrak is not the sole applicant;</P>
                <P>(B) Applications were submitted jointly by multiple eligible applicants; and</P>
                <P>(C) The proposed Federal share of total project costs does not exceed 50 percent.</P>
                <P>ii. After applying the above preferences, FRA will take in account the following key DOT priorities:</P>
                <P>(A) Supporting economic vitality at the national and regional level;</P>
                <P>(B) Leveraging Federal funding to attract other, non-Federal sources of infrastructure investment;</P>
                <P>(C) Preparing for future operations and maintenance costs associated with a project's life-cycle, as demonstrated by a credible plan to maintain assets without having to rely on future Federal funding;</P>
                <P>(D) Using innovative approaches to improve safety and expedite project delivery;</P>
                <P>(E) Holding grant recipients accountable for grant performance and achieving specific, measurable outcomes identified by grant applicants;</P>
                <P>(F) Proposed non-Federal share is comprised of more than one source, including private sources, demonstrating broad participation by affected stakeholders; and</P>
                <P>(G) Applications indicate strong project readiness.</P>
                <P>iii. For NEC Projects, FRA will consider the appropriate sequence and phasing of projects as contained in the Northeast Corridor capital investment plan developed pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 24904(a).</P>
                <P>
                    iv. In determining the allocation of program funds, FRA may also consider geographic diversity, diversity in the size of the systems receiving funding, the applicant's receipt of other competitive awards, projects located in or that support transportation service in a qualified opportunity zone designated pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 1400Z-1, the 
                    <PRTPAGE P="35506"/>
                    percentage of non-Federal share provided, the percentage of non-Federal share provided as a cash contribution, and whether such non-Federal share is provided by multiple sources.
                </P>
                <P>
                    v. Consistent with DOT's R.O.U.T.E.S. Initiative (
                    <E T="03">https://www.transportation.gov/rural</E>
                    ), DOT recognizes that rural transportation networks face unique challenges. To the extent that those challenges are reflected in the applicant's response to the criteria listed in this section, DOT will consider how the activities proposed in the application will address those challenges, regardless of the geographic location of those activities.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Review and Selection Process</HD>
                <P>FRA will conduct a four-part application review process, as follows:</P>
                <P>a. Screen applications for completeness, eligibility, and applicant risk;</P>
                <P>b. Evaluate eligible applications (completed by technical panels applying the evaluation criteria);</P>
                <P>c. Review, apply selection criteria and recommend initial selection of projects for the FRA Administrator's review (completed by a non-career Senior Review Team, which includes senior leadership from the Office of the Secretary and FRA); and</P>
                <P>d. Select recommended awards for the Secretary's review and approval (completed by the FRA Administrator.)</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Reporting Matters Related to Integrity and Performance</HD>
                <P>Before making a Federal award with a total amount of Federal share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold (see 2 CFR 200.88 Simplified Acquisition Threshold), FRA will review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)). See 41 U.S.C. 2313.</P>
                <P>An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.</P>
                <P>FRA will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.205.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">F. Federal Award Administration Information</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">1. Federal Award Notice</HD>
                <P>
                    FRA will announce applications selected for funding in a press release and on FRA's website after the application review period. This announcement is FRA's notification to successful and unsuccessful applicants alike. FRA will contact applicants with successful applications after announcement with information and instructions about the award process. This notification is not an authorization to begin proposed project activities. A formal grant agreement signed by both the grantee and FRA, including an approved scope, schedule, and budget, is required before the award is considered complete. See an example of standard terms and conditions for FRA grant awards at 
                    <E T="03">https://railroads.fra.dot.gov/elibrary/award-administration-and-grant-conditions.</E>
                     This template is subject to revision.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements</HD>
                <P>In connection with any program or activity conducted with or benefiting from funds awarded under this notice, recipients of funds must comply with all applicable requirements of Federal law, including, without limitation, the Constitution of the United States; the conditions of performance, nondiscrimination requirements, and other assurances made applicable to the award of funds in accordance with regulations of DOT; and applicable Federal financial assistance and contracting principles promulgated by the Office of Management and Budget. In complying with these requirements, recipients, in particular, must ensure that no concession agreements are denied or other contracting decisions made on the basis of speech or other activities protected by the First Amendment. If DOT determines that a recipient has failed to comply with applicable Federal requirements, DOT may terminate the award of funds and disallow previously incurred costs, requiring the recipient to reimburse any expended award funds.</P>
                <P>Examples of administrative and national policy requirements include: 2 CFR part 200; procurement standards at 2 CFR part 200 Subpart D—Procurement Standards, 2 CFR 1207.317 and 2 CFR 200.401; compliance with Federal civil rights laws and regulations; disadvantaged business enterprises; debarment and suspension; drug-free workplace; FRA's and OMB's Assurances and Certifications; Americans with Disabilities Act; safety requirements; NEPA; environmental justice and the grant conditions in 49 U.S.C. 22905 including the Buy America requirements, the provision deeming operators rail carriers and employers for certain purposes, grantee agreements with railroad right-of-way owners for projects using railroad rights-of-way, and compliance with 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2) for the duration of NEC Projects.</P>
                <P>
                    Grantees must comply with applicable appropriations act requirements and all relevant requirements of 2 CFR part 200. Rights to intangible property under grants awarded under this NOFO are governed in accordance with 2 CFR 200.315. Unless otherwise stated in the Federal award, FRA will not consider non-federal entities as that term is used in 2 CFR part 200 to include for-profit entities. See an example of standard terms and conditions for FRA grant awards at 
                    <E T="03">https://railroads.fra.dot.gov/elibrary/award-administration-and-grant-conditions.</E>
                     This template is subject to revision.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD2">3. Reporting</HD>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">a. Progress Reporting on Grant Activity</HD>
                <P>Each applicant selected for a grant will be required to comply with all standard FRA reporting requirements, including quarterly progress reports, quarterly Federal financial reports, and interim and final performance reports, as well as all applicable auditing, monitoring and close out requirements. Reports may be submitted electronically.</P>
                <P>The applicant must comply with all relevant requirements of 2 CFR part 200.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">b. Additional Reporting</HD>
                <P>
                    Applicants selected for funding are required to comply with all reporting requirements in the standard terms and conditions for FRA grant awards including 2 CFR 180.335 and 2 CFR 180.350. See an example of standard terms and conditions for FRA grant awards at: 
                    <E T="03">https://railroads.fra.dot.gov/elibrary/award-administration-and-grant-conditions.</E>
                </P>
                <P>
                    If the Federal share of any Federal award under this NOFO includes more than $500,000 over the period of performance, applicants are informed of the post award reporting requirements reflected in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII—Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
                    <PRTPAGE P="35507"/>
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD3">c. Performance Reporting</HD>
                <P>Each applicant selected for funding must collect information and report on the project's performance using measures mutually agreed upon by FRA and the grantee to assess progress in achieving strategic goals and objectives. Examples of some rail performance measures are listed in the table below. The applicable measure(s) will depend upon the type of project. Applicants requesting funding for rolling stock must integrate at least one equipment/rolling stock performance measure, consistent with the grantee's application materials and program goals.</P>
                <GPOTABLE COLS="6" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s30,r25,r25,r40,r40,r80">
                    <TTITLE>Performance Measure</TTITLE>
                    <BOXHD>
                        <CHED H="1">Rail measures</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Unit measured</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Temporal</CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Primary 
                            <LI>strategic goal</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">
                            Secondary 
                            <LI>strategic goal</LI>
                        </CHED>
                        <CHED H="1">Description</CHED>
                    </BOXHD>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Slow Order Miles</ENT>
                        <ENT>Miles</ENT>
                        <ENT>Annual</ENT>
                        <ENT>State of Good Repair</ENT>
                        <ENT>Safety</ENT>
                        <ENT>The number of miles per year within the project area that have temporary speed restrictions (“slow orders”) imposed due to track condition. This is an indicator of the overall condition of track. This measure can be used for projects to rehabilitate sections of a rail line since the rehabilitation should eliminate, or at least reduce the slow orders upon project completion.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Rail Track Grade Separation</ENT>
                        <ENT>Count</ENT>
                        <ENT>Annual</ENT>
                        <ENT>Economic Competitiveness</ENT>
                        <ENT>Safety</ENT>
                        <ENT>The number of annual automobile crossings that are eliminated at an at-grade crossing as a result of a new grade separation.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Passenger Counts</ENT>
                        <ENT>Count</ENT>
                        <ENT>Annual</ENT>
                        <ENT>Economic Competitiveness</ENT>
                        <ENT>State of Good Repair</ENT>
                        <ENT>Count of the annual passenger boardings and alightings at stations within the project area.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Travel Time</ENT>
                        <ENT>Time/Trip</ENT>
                        <ENT>Annual</ENT>
                        <ENT>Economic Competitiveness</ENT>
                        <ENT>Quality of Life</ENT>
                        <ENT>Point-to-point travel times between pre-determined station stops within the project area. This measure demonstrates how track improvements and other upgrades improve operations on a rail line. It also helps make sure the railroad is maintaining the line after project completion.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                    <ROW>
                        <ENT I="01">Track Miles</ENT>
                        <ENT>Miles</ENT>
                        <ENT>One Time</ENT>
                        <ENT>State of Good Repair</ENT>
                        <ENT>Economic Competitiveness</ENT>
                        <ENT>The number of track miles that exist within the project area. This measure can be beneficial for projects building sidings or sections of additional main line track on a railroad.</ENT>
                    </ROW>
                </GPOTABLE>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts</HD>
                <P>
                    For further information related to this notice, please contact Mr. Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590; email: 
                    <E T="03">Bryan.Rodda@dot.gov;</E>
                     phone: 202-493-0443, or Ms. Ruthie Americus, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-403, Washington, DC 20590; email: 
                    <E T="03">Ruthie.Americus@dot.gov;</E>
                     phone: 202-493-0431.
                </P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">H. Other Information</HD>
                <P>All information submitted as part of or in support of any application shall use publicly available data or data that can be made public and methodologies that are accepted by industry practice and standards, to the extent possible. If the application includes information the applicant considers to be a trade secret or confidential commercial or financial information, the applicant should do the following: (1) Note on the front cover that the submission “Contains Confidential Business Information (CBI)”; (2) mark each affected page “CBI”; and (3) highlight or otherwise denote the CBI portions.</P>
                <P>The DOT regulations implementing the FOIA are found at 49 CFR part 7 Subpart C—Availability of Reasonably Described Records under the Freedom of Information Act which sets forth rules for FRA to make requested materials, information and, and records publicly available under FOIA. Unless prohibited by law and to the extent permitted under the FOIA, contents of application and proposals submitted by successful applicants may be released in response to FOIA requests.</P>
                <SIG>
                    <P>Issued in Washington, DC.</P>
                    <NAME>Quintin Kendall,</NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Administrator.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12542 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4910-06-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
        <NOTICE>
            <PREAMB>
                <AGENCY TYPE="N">DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY</AGENCY>
                <SUBAGY>Financial Crimes Enforcement Network</SUBAGY>
                <SUBJECT>Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Renewal; Comment Request; Renewal Without Change of the Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery</SUBJECT>
                <AGY>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                    <P>Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), Treasury.</P>
                </AGY>
                <ACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                    <P>Notice and request for comments.</P>
                </ACT>
                <SUM>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                    <P>As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, FinCEN invites comments on a proposed renewal, without change, of currently approved information collections relating to the generic clearance for the collection of qualitative feedback on agency service delivery. This request for comments is being made pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.</P>
                </SUM>
                <DATES>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                    <P>Written comments are welcome, and must be received on or before August 10, 2020.</P>
                </DATES>
                <ADD>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35508"/>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                    <P>Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:</P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Federal E-rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Refer to Docket Number FINCEN-2020-0007 and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 1506-0062.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        • 
                        <E T="03">Mail:</E>
                         Policy Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, P.O. Box 39, Vienna, VA 22183. Refer to Docket Number FINCEN-2020-0007 and OMB control number 1506-0062.
                    </P>
                    <P>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.</P>
                </ADD>
                <FURINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                    <P>
                        The FinCEN Regulatory Support Section at 800-767-2825 or electronically at 
                        <E T="03">frc@fincen.gov.</E>
                    </P>
                </FURINF>
            </PREAMB>
            <SUPLINF>
                <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                <P/>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Statutory and Regulatory Provisions</HD>
                <P>The legislative framework generally referred to as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) consists of the Currency and Financial Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, as amended by the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act) (Pub. L. 107-56) and other legislation. The BSA is codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314 and 5316-5332, and notes thereto, with implementing regulations at 31 CFR chapter X.</P>
                <P>
                    The BSA authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, 
                    <E T="03">inter alia,</E>
                     to require financial institutions to keep records and file reports that are determined to have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, and regulatory matters, or in the conduct of intelligence or counter-intelligence activities, to protect against international terrorism, and to implement counter-money laundering programs and compliance procedures.
                    <SU>1</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                     Regulations implementing Title II of the BSA appear at 31 CFR chapter X. The authority of the Secretary to administer the BSA has been delegated to the Director of FinCEN.
                    <SU>2</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>1</SU>
                         Section 358 of the USA PATRIOT Act added language expanding the scope of the BSA to intelligence or counter-intelligence activities to protect against international terrorism.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>2</SU>
                         Treasury Order 180-01 (re-affirmed January 14, 2020).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>FinCEN periodically surveys its stakeholders to collect qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Agency's commitment to improving service delivery.</P>
                <HD SOURCE="HD1">
                    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 
                    <SU>3</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </HD>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>3</SU>
                         Public Law 104-13, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Title:</E>
                     Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">OMB Control Number:</E>
                     1506-0062.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Abstract:</E>
                     FinCEN is issuing this notice to renew, without change, the Agency's capability to solicit feedback from the public with respect to timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable. The Agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:
                </P>
                <P>• The collections are voluntary;</P>
                <P>• The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and are low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal government;</P>
                <P>• The collections are noncontroversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;</P>
                <P>• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;</P>
                <P>• Personally identifiable information is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;</P>
                <P>• Information gathered is intended to be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency (if released, the agency must indicate the qualitative nature of the information);</P>
                <P>• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and</P>
                <P>• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Type of Review:</E>
                     Renewal without change of a currently approved information collection.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Affected Public:</E>
                     Business or other for-profit institutions, and non-profit institutions.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Frequency:</E>
                     As required.
                </P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Respondents:</E>
                     15,000 respondents.
                    <SU>4</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>4</SU>
                         FinCEN anticipates it will send surveys to approximately 15,000 BSA-regulated financial institutions over the three-year period requested for approval of this OMB control number.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Responses:</E>
                     15,000 responses.
                    <SU>5</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>5</SU>
                         FinCEN anticipates, on average, sending ten surveys per year to approximately 500 respondents per survey. Over the three-year period requested for approval of this OMB control number that equates to 15,000 responses.
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Estimated Number of Hours:</E>
                     10,000 hours.
                    <SU>6</SU>
                    <FTREF/>
                </P>
                <FTNT>
                    <P>
                        <SU>6</SU>
                         FinCEN anticipates the surveys will average 15 to 40 minutes to complete, so FinCEN will conservatively approximate 10,000 burden hours are needed for the three-year period requested for approval of this OMB control number (40 minutes multiplied by 15,000 responses converted to hours).
                    </P>
                </FTNT>
                <P>An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by the OMB.</P>
                <P>
                    <E T="03">Request for Comments:</E>
                     Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance and purchase of services to provide information.
                </P>
                <SIG>
                    <DATED>Dated: June 4, 2020.</DATED>
                    <NAME>Derek Baldry, </NAME>
                    <TITLE>Deputy Chief of Staff, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.</TITLE>
                </SIG>
            </SUPLINF>
            <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-12540 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
            <BILCOD> BILLING CODE 4810-02-P</BILCOD>
        </NOTICE>
    </NOTICES>
    <VOL>85</VOL>
    <NO>112</NO>
    <DATE>Wednesday, June 10, 2020</DATE>
    <UNITNAME>Proposed Rules</UNITNAME>
    <NEWPART>
        <PTITLE>
            <PRTPAGE P="35509"/>
            <PARTNO>Part II</PARTNO>
            <AGENCY TYPE="P">Department of the Interior</AGENCY>
            <SUBAGY>Fish and Wildlife Service</SUBAGY>
            <HRULE/>
            <CFR>50 CFR Part 17</CFR>
            <TITLE>Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Florida Bonneted Bat; Proposed Rule</TITLE>
        </PTITLE>
        <PRORULES>
            <PRORULE>
                <PREAMB>
                    <PRTPAGE P="35510"/>
                    <AGENCY TYPE="S">DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR</AGENCY>
                    <SUBAGY>Fish and Wildlife Service</SUBAGY>
                    <CFR>50 CFR Part 17</CFR>
                    <DEPDOC>[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106; FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 201]</DEPDOC>
                    <RIN>RIN 1018-BE10</RIN>
                    <SUBJECT>Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Florida Bonneted Bat</SUBJECT>
                    <AGY>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD>
                        <P>Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.</P>
                    </AGY>
                    <ACT>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD>
                        <P>Proposed rule.</P>
                    </ACT>
                    <SUM>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD>
                        <P>
                            We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to designate critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat (
                            <E T="03">Eumops floridanus</E>
                            ) under the Endangered Species Act (Act). Approximately 598,261 hectares (ha) (1,478,333 acres (ac)) in portions of 10 Florida counties fall within the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designation. If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to this species' critical habitat. We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis of the proposed designation.
                        </P>
                    </SUM>
                    <EFFDATE>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD>
                        <P>
                            We will accept comments on the proposed rule or draft economic analysis that are received or postmarked on or before August 10, 2020. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see 
                            <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                            , below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in 
                            <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                             by July 27, 2020.
                        </P>
                    </EFFDATE>
                    <ADD>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD>
                        <P>
                            <E T="03">Comment submission:</E>
                             You may submit comments on the proposed rule or draft economic analysis by one of the following methods:
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (1) 
                            <E T="03">Electronically:</E>
                             Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                             In the Search box, enter Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the Search button. On the resulting page, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rules box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (2) 
                            <E T="03">By hard copy:</E>
                             Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; MS: JAO/1N, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                             This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            <E T="03">Document availability:</E>
                             The draft economic analysis is available at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/,</E>
                             at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                             at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, and at the South Florida Ecological Services Field Office (see 
                            <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                            ).
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are generated for this proposed critical habitat designation are available at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/,</E>
                             at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                             at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, and at the South Florida Ecological Services Field Office (see 
                            <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                            ). Supporting documents, consisting of supplemental information and details relating to conservation lands, can be found at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                             at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106. Any additional tools or supporting information that we may develop for this critical habitat designation will also be available at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service website and field office listed below, and may also be included in the preamble below and/or at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                        </P>
                    </ADD>
                    <FURINF>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD>
                        <P>Roxanna Hinzman, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3559; telephone 772-562-3909. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.</P>
                    </FURINF>
                </PREAMB>
                <SUPLINF>
                    <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD>
                    <P/>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Executive Summary</HD>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Why we need to publish a proposed rule.</E>
                         Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (“Act”; 16 U.S.C. 1531 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        ), when we determine that any species is an endangered or threatened species, we are required to designate critical habitat, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable. Designations of critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">What this document does.</E>
                         This document proposes a designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat, an endangered species, in portions of 10 Florida counties.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">The basis for our action.</E>
                         Under the Act, if we determine that a species is an endangered or threatened species we must, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, designate critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall designate critical habitat on the basis of the best available scientific data after taking into consideration the economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate such area will result in the extinction of the species.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">Economic analysis.</E>
                         We have prepared a draft analysis of the economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation. We are announcing the availability of the draft economic analysis (DEA) with the publication of this proposed rule and are seeking public review and comment on the DEA as well as on the proposed rule.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">We are seeking peer review.</E>
                         We are seeking comments from independent specialists to ensure that our critical habitat proposal is based on scientifically sound data and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment on our specific assumptions and conclusions in this proposed rule.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Uncommon Acronyms Used in this Proposed Rule</HD>
                    <P>For the convenience of the reader, listed below are some of the acronyms used in this proposed rule:</P>
                    <EXTRACT>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">APAFR = Avon Park Air Force Range</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">BCNP = Big Cypress National Preserve</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">DoD = Department of Defense</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">DHS = Department of Homeland Security</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">ENP = Everglades National Park</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FLUCCS = Florida Land Use and Cover Classification System</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FNAI = Florida Natural Areas Inventory</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FPNWR = Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FSPSP = Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">IEM = incremental effects memorandum</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">INRMP = integrated natural resources management plan</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">PBFs = physical or biological features</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">PSSF = Picayune Strand State Forest</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">
                            RCW = red-cockaded woodpecker (
                            <E T="03">Picoides borealis</E>
                            )
                        </FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">UF = University of Florida</FP>
                        <FP SOURCE="FP-1">WMA = Wildlife Management Area</FP>
                    </EXTRACT>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Information Requested</HD>
                    <P>
                        We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on the best scientific data available and be as accurate and as 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35511"/>
                        effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or information from other concerned government agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments concerning:
                    </P>
                    <P>(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as “critical habitat” under section 4 of the Act including information to inform the following factors that the regulations identify as reasons why a designation of critical habitat may be not prudent:</P>
                    <P>(a) 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;</P>
                    <P>(b) 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;</P>
                    <P>(c) 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; or</P>
                    <P>(d) No areas meet the definition of critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>(2) Specific information on:</P>
                    <P>(a) The amount and distribution of Florida bonneted bat habitat.</P>
                    <P>(b) What may constitute “physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species,” within the geographical range currently occupied by the Florida bonneted bat.</P>
                    <P>(c) Where these features are currently found.</P>
                    <P>(d) Whether any of these features within areas we are proposing as critical habitat may require special management considerations or protection, including managing for the potential effects of climate change.</P>
                    <P>(e) What areas, that may be considered occupied at the time of listing and that contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species, should be included in the designation.</P>
                    <P>(f) Whether occupied areas may be inadequate for the conservation of the species, and if so, we particularly seek comments regarding:</P>
                    <P>(i) What areas not occupied at the time of listing may be essential for the conservation of the species; and</P>
                    <P>(ii) Specific information regarding whether such unoccupied areas will, with reasonable certainty, contribute to the conservation of the species and contain at least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation of the species.</P>
                    <P>
                        (g) Any additional areas occurring within the range of the species, 
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         south and central Florida, that should be included in the designation because they (1) are occupied at the time of listing and contain the physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations, or (2) are unoccupied at the time of listing and are essential for the conservation of the species.
                    </P>
                    <P>(h) Whether we have determined the most appropriate size and configuration of our proposed critical habitat units.</P>
                    <P>(i) Whether any delineated area within the proposed critical habitat appears to be a result of occupancy data associated with artificial structures, and any support for the area's inclusion or omission. (Our analyses were based on habitat requirements, natural roosts, and presence data, and due to the species' large foraging distance, it is unlikely that any areas were included solely due to the presence of an artificial structure; nonetheless, we seek comment on this.)</P>
                    <P>(j) Whether artificial structures that provide roosting sites, particularly bat houses, and structures that may provide roost sites, such as bridges, may be essential for the conservation of the species and why.</P>
                    <P>(k) Whether agricultural lands that may provide foraging habitat are essential for the conservation of the species and why.</P>
                    <P>
                        (3) Land use designations and current or planned activities (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         proposed development, wind energy projects, etc.) in the subject areas and their possible impacts on the Florida bonneted bat and proposed critical habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>(4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of climate change on the Florida bonneted bat and proposed critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>(5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final designation, and the related benefits of including or excluding areas that may be impacted.</P>
                    <P>(6) Information on the extent to which the description of probable economic impacts in the draft economic analysis is a reasonable estimate of the likely economic impacts.</P>
                    <P>(7) The likelihood of adverse social reactions to the designation of critical habitat and how the consequences of such reactions, if likely to occur, would relate to the conservation and regulatory benefits of the proposed critical habitat designation.</P>
                    <P>(8) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We particularly seek comments regarding lands that could be considered for exclusion based on a conservation program or plan, and why. These may include Federal, Tribal, State, County, local, or private lands with permitted conservation plans covering the species in the area such as habitat conservation plans, safe harbor agreements, or conservation easements, or non-permitted conservation agreements and partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. Detailed information regarding these plans, agreements, easements, and partnerships is also requested, including:</P>
                    <P>(a) The location and size of lands covered by the plan, agreement, easement, or partnership;</P>
                    <P>(b) The duration of the plan, agreement, easement, or partnership;</P>
                    <P>(c) Who holds or manages the land;</P>
                    <P>(d) What management activities are conducted;</P>
                    <P>(e) What land uses are allowable; and</P>
                    <P>(f) If management activities are beneficial to the Florida bonnet bat and its habitat.</P>
                    <P>(9) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation and understanding or to better accommodate public concerns and comments.</P>
                    <P>
                        Because we will consider all comments and information we receive during the comment period, our final designation may differ from this proposal. Based on the new information we receive (and any comments on that new information), our final designation may not include all areas proposed, may include some additional areas, and may exclude some areas if we find the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion. Such final decisions would be a logical outgrowth of this proposal, as long as: (1) We base the decisions on the best scientific and commercial data available and take into consideration the relevant impacts; (2) we articulate a rational connection between the facts found and the conclusions made, including why we changed our conclusion; and (3) we base removal of any areas on a determination either that the area does not meet the definition of “critical habitat” or that the benefits of excluding the area will outweigh the benefits of including it in the designation. You may submit your comments and materials concerning this 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35512"/>
                        proposed rule by one of the methods listed in 
                        <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                        . We request that you send comments only by the methods described in 
                        <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                        .
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        All comments submitted electronically via 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         will be presented on the website in their entirety as submitted. For comments submitted via hard copy, we will post your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—on 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov.</E>
                         You may request at the top of your document that we withhold personal information such as your street address, phone number, or email address from public review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection on 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov,</E>
                         or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecological Services Field Office (see 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                        ).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Previous Federal Actions</HD>
                    <P>Federal actions for the Florida bonneted bat prior to October 4, 2012, are outlined in our proposed listing rule for the bat (77 FR 60750), which was published on that date. On October 2, 2013, after consideration of available scientific information, and peer review and public comments on the proposed listing rule, we published a final rule listing the Florida bonneted bat as an endangered species (78 FR 61004).</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Background</HD>
                    <P>Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:</P>
                    <P>(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or biological features</P>
                    <P>(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and</P>
                    <P>(b) Which may require special management considerations or protection; and</P>
                    <P>(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.</P>
                    <P>Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated with scientific resources management such as research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking.</P>
                    <P>Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such designation does not allow the government or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species or critical habitat, the Federal agency would be required to consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. However, even if the Service were to conclude that the proposed activity would result in destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat, the Federal action agency and the landowner are not required to abandon the proposed activity, or to restore or recover the species; instead, they must implement “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the conservation of the species and (2) which may require special management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those physical or biological features that occur in specific occupied areas, we focus on the specific features that are essential to support the life-history needs of the species, including, but not limited to, water characteristics, soil type, geological features, roost 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.</P>
                    <P>Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, we may designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. On August 27, 2019, we published final revised regulations outlining the criteria for designating critical habitat (84 FR 45020). We stated that, when designating critical habitat, the Secretary will first evaluate areas occupied by the species. The Secretary will only consider unoccupied areas to be essential where a critical habitat designation limited to geographical areas occupied by the species would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species. In addition, for an unoccupied area to be considered essential, the Secretary 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.</P>
                    <P>
                        Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available. They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        When we are determining which areas should be designated as critical habitat, 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35513"/>
                        our primary source of information is generally the information developed during the listing process for the species. Additional information sources may include any generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or outline that may have been developed for the species, the recovery plan for the species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and studies, biological assessments, other unpublished materials, or experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
                    </P>
                    <P>Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species, and (3) section 9 of the Act's prohibitions on taking any individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of the best available information at the time of designation will not control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning efforts if new information available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different outcome.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Prudency Determination</HD>
                    <P>Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary shall designate critical habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the Secretary may, but is not required to, determine that a designation would not be prudent in the following circumstances:</P>
                    <P>(i) 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;</P>
                    <P>(ii) 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;</P>
                    <P>(iii) 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;</P>
                    <P>(iv) No areas meet the definition of critical habitat; or</P>
                    <P>(v) The Secretary otherwise determines that designation of critical habitat would not be prudent based on the best scientific data available.</P>
                    <P>
                        We find that none of the aforementioned factors above apply to the Florida bonneted bat. First, there is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to collection for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor B,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). However, humans often consider bats as “nuisance” species and seek their removal when they occur in or around human dwellings or infrastructure (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor D</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The Florida bonneted bat is at risk of take in the form of inadvertent or purposeful removal, displacement, and disturbance wherever it occurs in or near human dwellings or structures (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor D</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Designation of critical habitat could result in an increased threat of taking of individuals in some areas, through publication of maps and a narrative description of specific habitat units in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                        . However, this factor is not expected to appreciably increase the degree of threat to the species because it would presumably apply only to individuals under certain circumstances (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         where bats are roosting in or near human dwellings or structures and where humans are intolerant of bat presence) where risks from humans already exist. Therefore, identification and mapping of critical habitat are not expected to initiate new threats or significantly increase existing threats.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Additionally, while some threats to the species' habitat may stem from sea level rise or other effects of climate change that may not be addressed through management actions under section 7(a)(2), the Florida bonneted bat was listed as an endangered species due largely to both historical and ongoing habitat loss and degradation associated with development and agricultural practices. Therefore, actions causing this habitat loss and degradation may include those that can be addressed through management actions resulting from consultations under section 7(a)(2) of the Act (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         loss of roost sites and foraging habitat, development associated with human population growth and agriculture; see especially 
                        <E T="03">Factor A</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <P>Further, this species does not occur outside the United States, in fact its range is restricted to south and central Florida. Specific areas within this range meet the definition of critical habitat (see above), and the best scientific data available indicates a benefit of designating critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>
                        <E T="03">The potential benefits of designation include:</E>
                         (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the Act in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has become unoccupied or the occupancy is in question; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most essential features and areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or county governments or private entities; and (4) reducing the inadvertent harm to the species caused by people.
                    </P>
                    <P>Therefore, we find designation of critical habitat is prudent for the Florida bonneted bat.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Critical Habitat Determinability</HD>
                    <P>Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the following situations exist:</P>
                    <P>(i) Data sufficient to perform required analyses are lacking, or</P>
                    <P>(ii) The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to identify any area that meets the definition of “critical habitat.”</P>
                    <P>
                        In our proposed listing rule (77 FR 60750, October 4, 2012), we found that critical habitat was not determinable because the biological needs of the species were not sufficiently well known to permit identification of areas as critical habitat. Our final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013), summarized much of the new information and data that had been 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35514"/>
                        obtained following publication of the proposed listing rule. We announced that we would continue to work closely with researchers, agencies, and other partners to seek new information about the species and its habitat needs to determine its critical habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Since that time, we have reviewed the available information pertaining to the biological needs of the species and habitat characteristics where the species is located. Substantial new scientific information has been obtained by researchers, agencies, conservation organizations, industry, and other partners. Where information gaps on the Florida bonneted bat remain, we rely on available information on other 
                        <E T="03">Eumops,</E>
                         other molossids (free-tailed bats), and other comparable bat species. To fulfill the requirements of the Act, we are now proposing the designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Physical or Biological Features</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing to designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical or biological features (PBFs) that are essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection. The regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define “physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species” as the features 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.</P>
                    <P>For example, physical features might include gravel of a particular size required for spawning, alkali soil for seed germination, protective cover for migration, or susceptibility to flooding or fire that maintains necessary early-successional habitat characteristics. Biological features might include prey species, forage grasses, specific kinds or ages of trees for roosting or nesting, symbiotic fungi, or a particular level of nonnative species consistent with conservation needs of the listed species. The features may also be combinations of habitat characteristics and may encompass the relationship between characteristics or the necessary amount of a characteristic needed to support the life history of the species. In considering whether features are essential to the conservation of the species, the Service may consider an appropriate quality, quantity, and spatial and temporal arrangement of habitat characteristics in the context of the life-history needs, condition, and status of the species. These characteristics include, but are not limited to, space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development) of offspring; and habitats that are protected from disturbance.</P>
                    <P>
                        In general, important and basic components of bat conservation include: Protection of roosting habitat; protection of foraging habitat; and protection of the prey base (Humphrey 1975, pp. 321-346; Fenton 1997, entire; Pierson 1998, pp. 309-325; O'Donnell 2001, entire; Agosta 2002, pp. 188-193; Sparks 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2005, entire; Knight and Jones 2009, entire; Hagen and Sabo 2011, p. 759). Both the amount and spatial distribution of roosting and foraging habitat likely influence the survival and reproduction of Florida bonneted bats. Successful dispersal is likely essential to maintaining genetic and demographic connections among populations across the range of the species.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The ecology and long-term habitat requirements of the Florida bonneted bat are not fully understood (Robson 1989, p. 2; Robson 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1989, p. 81; Belwood 1992, p. 219; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 859; Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 240; 2018, p. 1121; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 1; Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, entire). Habitat for the bat mainly consists of foraging areas and roosting sites, including artificial structures. As of May 2019, researchers had found 19 natural roost sites in live trees and snags and determined that 6 roost trees had fallen or were too damaged for future use by bats, 3 were confirmed active, 3 were inactive, and 7 were unknown (Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2019a). Only very limited information on historical sites is available. Recent information on habitat has been obtained largely through: Acoustical surveys, designed to detect and record bat echolocation calls; limited tracking using radio-transmitters, GPS satellite tags, and other techniques; and other studies (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         guano (excrement) analysis) (see 
                        <E T="03">Life History</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Habitat,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat uses forests and a variety of other natural and developed areas, within south, southwest, and south-central Florida (see 
                        <E T="03">Life History, Habitat,</E>
                         and table 1, final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). They have been recorded in a wide array of habitat types, including: Pine flatwoods, pine rocklands, cypress, hardwood hammocks, mangroves, wetlands, rivers, lakes, ponds, canals, other natural areas, rural and agriculture lands, including groves, tropical gardens, crop-based agriculture; as well as residential and urban areas (Arwood, pers. comm., 2008a-b, 2012a, 2013a-c, 2014a-d; Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 13-14; 2008b, pp. 2-5; 2008c, pp. 1-28; 2012, pp. 1-22; Smith 2010, entire; Snow, pers. comm., 2011a-b, 2012a-g, 2013; 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012; Owen, pers. comm., 2012; Rau, pers. comm. 2012; Maehr 2013, entire; Maehr, pers. comm., 2013a-b; Relish, pers. comm., 2013; Ridgley, pers. comm., 2013a-d; 2014a-c; Scofield, pers. comm., 2013a-f; Smith, pers. comm., 2013; Ober 2015, p. 3; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm., 2015a; Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, entire; Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, entire). Florida bonneted bats at Big Cypress National Park (BCNP) are generally more active near places with permanent open water (Arwood, pers. comm., 2013c). At Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR), the species uses forested areas, open water, and wetlands (Maehr 2013, entire).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        We used a series of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) analyses to examine all available location data associated with Florida bonneted bat presences from 2003 through 2014 (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         confirmed recorded call data (taken through acoustical devices), audible call data (heard by experts), and occupied bat houses) and land use/land coverages to better understand habitat use as described in the PBF discussion below (see also 
                        <E T="03">Habitat Analyses</E>
                         under Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat, below). Examining land coverages within 1.6 km (1 mi) around all confirmed presences suggested that wetland forest (35 percent), open freshwater wetland (16 percent), and wet shrub (11 percent) were the predominant habitat types used. A similar analysis using presence data from natural areas only and examining land covers within this same distance suggested that wetland forest (40 percent), open freshwater wetland (18 percent), wet shrub (13 percent), upland forest (11 percent), and upland shrub (5 percent) were the predominant habitat types used. Examination of habitat use 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35515"/>
                        in separate geographical regions (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         west, southwest, southeast, and north-central Florida) reinforced the finding that forests are important habitat types, but suggested differences between geographic regions. For example, Florida bonneted bats may rely on wetland forests for roosting habitat in Collier County, but may rely on more upland forests for roosting in Charlotte County, where conditions are generally drier. Analysis of land covers within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the first known natural roost site (at Avon Park Air Force Range in Polk County) suggested that upland forest (61 percent) and upland shrub (30 percent) were key land cover types for roosting.
                    </P>
                    <P>The analyses of land cover use described above were conducted shortly after the species' listing. New presence data, collected after these analyses through 2019, were found to be consistent with these earlier results.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior</HD>
                    <P>
                        At the time of listing, core areas for the Florida bonneted bat were identified that included areas with consistent use by, or repeated detections of, the species and thereby assumed to possess characteristics fundamental to the species' ecology and be important for conservation and recovery (see detailed discussion under Core Areas in the final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). These areas, representing the most important sites for the bat known at the time, are located within Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and Miami-Dade Counties. Polk and Okeechobee Counties were also identified in the final listing rule as being occupied, but were not considered core areas, primarily because we lacked adequate survey information at the time. We now consider Polk County to be a core area based on several roost sites discovered at APAFR after listing (see 
                        <E T="03">Cover or Shelter,</E>
                         below; Angell and Thompson 2015, entire; Webb, pers. comm. 2018b; Myers, pers. comm. 2018a). New survey and life history information further support the identification of these core areas as those that are important for conservation and recovery of the Florida bonneted bat. We also identified these areas as important to the species in its recovery outline (a precursor to a recovery plan) (Service 2019, p. 2). Conservation of bat habitat within these core areas is necessary to ensure the species maintains sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and representation. As such, we consider suitable habitat within these core areas (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         Polk, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and Miami-Dade Counties) to be essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat needs suitable roosting habitat (for shelter, to rear young, for protection from predators) with limited disturbance, suitable foraging habitat, sufficient prey base (to meet its daily and seasonal dietary requirements and energy demands), and opportunities to disperse, exchange information, find mates, and reproduce for population growth. While much has been learned since listing about the species' roosting preferences, foraging behavior, habitat affinities, dispersal capabilities, and home ranges, not all aspects of these are clearly understood. In the largest and most comprehensive acoustic study undertaken for this species, bonneted bats were detected in all land cover types investigated, including the four major categories of uplands, wetlands, agricultural, and developed lands (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, entire).
                    </P>
                    <P>In an analysis of land cover types within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the first four roosts discovered, we found high percentages of forested habitats around each of the four roost sites examined. As indicated above, land covers surrounding the roost site at APAFR in Polk County comprise 61 percent upland forest and 30 percent upland shrub. In Collier County, land cover types surrounding the roost at Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park (FSPSP) are 97 percent wetland forest and 2 percent wetland shrub. Those surrounding the BCNP roost are 49 percent upland forest, 36 percent wetland forest, 11 percent wetland shrub, and 4 percent freshwater wetlands. Similarly, land cover types surrounding the FPNWR roost comprise 48 percent upland forest, 47 percent wetland forest, 3 percent open freshwater wetlands, and 2 percent shrub. Using this information regarding land cover types associated with roost sites, we identified specific habitat types within these cover types that are essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat.</P>
                    <P>
                        In natural areas, wetland and upland forests, open freshwater wetlands, wetland and upland shrub, and open water appear to be key habitat types. Natural areas provide better overall habitat (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         adequate foraging habitat, less disturbance, more opportunities to disperse) than urban areas, and limited information suggests the species uses forested areas for roosting in natural habitats (see 
                        <E T="03">Cover or Shelter,</E>
                         below). In general, open freshwater and wetlands, and other open natural habitats provide prime foraging areas for bats, providing important sources of water, concentrations of prey, and conditions and structure for finding and capturing prey. Bonneted bats use a “hawking” foraging method (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         pursue and catch prey in flight), and are capable of traveling at fast speeds due to their specialized wing morphology. Molossids generally incur high metabolic costs while hunting aerial insects and are less suited for maneuvering in more confined spaces due to their long and narrow wings; efficient foraging may be restricted to open spaces, shortly after sunset when numbers of high-flying insects are sufficiently high (Voigt and Holderied 2012, pp. 415, 423). Consequently, this species relies on speed and agility to catch target insects in the absence of background clutter, such as dense vegetation (Simmons 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1979, entire; Belwood 1992, p. 221; Best 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1997, p. 5; Voigt and Holderied 2012, entire). Foraging in open spaces, bonneted bats use echolocation to detect prey at relatively long range and high above the ground (Belwood 1992, p. 221; Best 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1997, p. 5; Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 5; Mora and Torres 2008, p. 7). Due to the species' physiology, we have identified open areas of freshwater and natural habitats as a feature essential to the conservation of this bat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Limited data (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         from three bats, tracked for three nights each) indicated that bonneted bats generally stayed within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the bat houses on Babcock-Webb Wildlife Management Area (WMA) but had longer foraging bouts each evening, ranging from 2.4 to 11.3 km (1.5 to 7 mi) (Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2015a; Ober 2015, p. 3). While at the time of listing, foraging and dispersal distances and home range sizes for the Florida bonneted bat had not been studied in great detail (Gillies, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012; G. Marks, pers. comm. 2012; Ober, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012; Gore, pers. comm. 2013), additional studies have provided valuable insights (Ober 2016, entire; Webb, pers. comm. 2018a-b). The Florida bonneted bat flies considerable distances; individuals foraged far (39 km (24 mi) maximum) from capture sites and covered long distances in one night (91 km (56 mi) maximum) (Ober 2016, p. 3; Webb, pers. comm. 2018 2012;b). Given this, it seems likely that foraging areas may be located fairly long distances from roost sites (Ober, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012). Further, the finding of only a few call sequences with substantial effort in close proximity to one known occupied active natural roost also suggests that bonneted bats may travel substantial distances from roosts and have very large home ranges. This finding aligns with relative 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35516"/>
                        sizes of home ranges of comparable and related species (Vaughan 1959, p. 18; Marques 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2004, entire; Corbett 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2008, entire; Rhodes and Catterall 2008, entire; Bonaccorso 2010, p. 11; Koob 2012, p. 2; Noer 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2012, entire; Ober, pers. comm. 2013). Based upon these characteristics and data, bonneted bats are expected to routinely range long distances, up to 24 km (15 mi) or more on foraging bouts, similar to the Underwood's mastiff bat (
                        <E T="03">E. underwoodi</E>
                        ) in Arizona (Tibbitts 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2002, p. 11; Gore, pers. comm. 2013). Consequently, we consider divergent areas for foraging and roosting as essential to the conservation of this bat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Dispersal is important for bats for inbreeding avoidance, exploiting available resources, and maintaining a persisting population through changing landscapes. This aspect of their life history is particularly difficult to study, as the species is generally secretive, flies, and is nocturnal (Petit and Mayer 1999, p. 1717). Evidence of temporary emigration and disappearance of juveniles after 8 months suggests Florida bonneted bats disperse from natal roosts (Bailey et al. 2017b, p. 556). More research on the bat's specific needs during dispersal is needed; however, geographic distance and ecological barriers (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         habitat fragmentation) are generally known to limit population expansion and gene flow within and among populations, and can block species movement required to adjust to environmental and habitat changes due to the dynamic nature of ecological systems, as well as habitat loss and climate change (Hilty 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2006, pp. 108-112). Consequently, we consider connectivity of suitable habitat necessary for natural and adaptive movements and thereby essential to the conservation of this species.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or Physiological Requirements</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat's precise foraging habits and long-term requirements are unknown (Belwood 1992, p. 219). However, active year-round and aseasonally polyestrous (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         having more than one period of estrous in a year, not restricted to one season) (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 859; Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 9; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, entire), the Florida bonneted bat likely needs constant sources and/or multiple sources of prey to support its high metabolism. Energy demands of the bonneted bat probably fluctuate seasonally (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         assumed higher demands during cold weather as it does not have periods of torpor (a state of decreased physiological activity in an animal, including decreased body temperature, heart rate, and metabolism)) and during sensitive times (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         maternity, nursery, supporting offspring). The maternity season is a time of particular sensitivity, with increased energy demands and risks as females leave young in roosts while making multiple foraging excursions to support lactation (Kurta 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1989a, entire; Kurta 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1990, entire; Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1995, entire; Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 8-9; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, entire). Exploitation of insects in patches that yield high-energy returns for pregnancy and lactation is important (Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1995, p. 412). Reduced insect populations in urban areas may make it difficult for females to successfully raise offspring to maturity (Kurta 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1990, entire; Kurta and Teramino 1992, p. 260).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Most insectivorous bats eat large quantities of insects (Ross 1967, entire; Black 1974, entire; Kunz 1974, entire; Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1995, entire; Kurta and Whitaker 1998, entire; Lee and McCracken 2002, pp. 306-313; 2005, entire; Leelapaibul 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2005, entire; Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2011, entire). Insectivorous bat activity and diversity are strongly correlated with arthropod abundance (Racey and Swift 1985, pp. 210-211, 214; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2004, entire; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2003, pp. 987-992), suggesting that bats seek out areas of concentrated prey sources (Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2011, p. 5). Foraging behavior is tied in part to insect abundance, availability, and density (Anthony and Kunz 1977, entire; Racey and Swift 1985, p. 212; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2003, pp. 987-992; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2004, entire). Exploitation of insects in patches that yield high-energy returns appears to be important for meeting the energy needs associated with prolonged flights as well as pregnancy and lactation (Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1995, p. 412). In general, bats foraging from continuous flight must encounter prey at relatively high rates and successfully attack many individual items (Fenton 1990, p. 416). Since Florida bonneted bats are thought to employ this feeding strategy, areas with higher insect abundance, more (multiple) prey sources, and diverse natural habitats that produce prey diversity are essential for suitable foraging habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Like other molossids (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         Brazilian free-tailed bats (
                        <E T="03">Tadarida brasiliensis</E>
                        )), the species may be a generalist predator, capable of opportunistically exploiting available resources (McCracken 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2012, entire). Limited information from guano analyses indicates Florida bonneted bats feed on flying insects of the following orders: Coleoptera (beetles), Diptera (flies), Hemiptera (true bugs), Lepidoptera (moths), and Trichoptera (caddisflies) (Belwood 1981, p. 412; 1992, p. 220; Marks 2013, entire; Marks and Marks 2015, pp. 2-3). Like other large molossids, the Florida bonneted bat's physiological characteristics (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         large size, broad jaws, big teeth, large ears) and lower-frequency echolocation make it well-equipped for finding and taking relatively larger insects and harder prey items (Freeman 1979, entire; 1981, pp. 166-173; Obrist 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1993, entire; Aguirre 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2003, p. 207; Timm and Genoways 2004, pp. 855-857; Mora and Torres 2008, p. 12).
                    </P>
                    <P>It is not clear if insect availability is limiting or sufficient; however, if the Florida bonneted bat is similar in its needs to other insectivorous bats, then reduced prey abundance or density could negatively affect the species, affecting survival, growth, and reproduction. We find that foraging habitat sufficient to support insect populations and the seasonal nutritional needs of the bat are essential to its conservation. Protecting natural habitats conducive to insect diversity (Marks 2013, p. 2) is also essential to the Florida bonneted bat's survival.</P>
                    <P>
                        Sources of drinking water are important for most insectivorous bat species (Kurta 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1989b, entire; 1990, pp. 59, 63; Adams and Hayes 2008, pp. 1, 6). Water sources and wetlands also provide important sources and concentrations of prey (Belwood and Fenton 1976, entire; Swift and Racey 1983, entire; Barclay 1991, pp. 174-176; Brigham 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1992, entire; Sullivan 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1993, entire; Racey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1998, pp. 200-201; Russo and Jones 2003, pp. 197, 201; Nam 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2012, p. 1095; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2004, p. 1289; Fukui 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2006, entire).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Water sources (for drinking, prey, and structure) are important habitat components for the Florida bonneted bat. This species forages over ponds, streams, and wetlands and drink when flying over open water (Marks and Marks 2008c, p. 4; 2008d, p. 3). For example, in BCNP the vast majority of Florida bonneted bat calls were recorded in 2014 at one remote pond surrounded by wetland forest (Arwood, pers. comm. 2014a-c). At Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF), all sites where the species has been detected were located near canals (Smith, pers. comm. 2013). At FPNWR, the highest detection of Florida bonneted bat calls occurred in areas with the largest amount of open water (Maehr 2013, pp. 7-11; Maehr, pers. comm. 2013a-c). In the Miami area (Richmond pine 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35517"/>
                        rocklands (Zoo Miami, Larry and Penny Thompson Park, and the Martinez Preserve)), the species has been detected in a variety of habitat types, but peak activity occurred in areas of artificial freshwater lakes adjacent to intact pine rocklands (Ridgley, pers. comm. 2013a-d).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        We find that open water and wetlands provide drinking water, open foraging areas, and concentrations of prey that are essential to the conservation of the species. During dry seasons, bats become more dependent on remaining ponds, streams, and wetland areas for foraging purposes, making these precious resources essential (Marks and Marks 2008c, p. 4; 2008d, p. 3). Because the Florida bonneted bat, like other 
                        <E T="03">Eumops,</E>
                         appears to be confined to foraging in open spaces due to its wing morphology (Norberg and Rayner 1987, pp. 399-400; Voigt and Holderied 2012, entire), larger water bodies and more open wetlands in general may be better foraging habitat, structurally, than smaller, more confined areas.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat's physiological or behavioral responses to abiotic factors, such as climate and artificial lighting, have not been specifically studied. Needs and requirements may be similar to those for other insectivorous species in semitropical or temperate environments. Light levels (and other environmental factors) trigger, in part, both the activity of bats and insects. Of factors influencing times of emergence in temperate bats, the overwhelming conclusion has been that light is the most important factor (Kunz 1974, p. 707). Artificial lighting (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         ecological light pollution) can have demonstrable effects on behavioral and population ecology of organisms, including bats and insects (Longcore and Rich 2004, pp. 193-195; see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Ecological Light Pollution,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Therefore, we find that natural habitats that are largely devoid of artificial lighting are likely most conducive to bonneted bat conservation.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Similarly, temperature requirements and tolerances for the Florida bonneted bat are not fully understood. The species is active year-round and considered semi-tropical (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, entire). Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         (2017a, p. 1589) detected bonneted bats at the northern portion of their study area (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         Polk and Osceola Counties) and suggested future surveys in additional counties to help determine the limit of the northern extent of the range. They found low probabilities of occurrence of bonneted bats in areas where historical mean minimum temperatures dropped below 15 degrees Celsius (°C) (59 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)) and suggested that the species may be limited to southern Florida due to temperature (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, p. 1591). At this time, the most northern known roost sites are located at APAFR and vicinity (Angell and Thompson 2015, entire; Webb, pers. comm., 2018b; Myers, pers. comm., 2018a). Mean monthly temperatures at this location range from 15 to 28 °C (60-83 °F), with an average low of 8.3 °C (47 °F) (January) and an average high of 33.9 °C (93 °F) (July). Prolonged cold temperatures resulted in bonneted bat mortalities at one known colony site in North Fort Myers, Florida, during a severe cold snap in 2010 (Trokey, pers. comm. 2010a-b; 2012a) (see also 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Limited data at survey sites in south Florida indicated reduced bat activity under conditions of lower ambient temperatures (Arwood, pers. comm. 2014e). In general, molossids that inhabit the warmer temperate and subtropical zones incur much higher energetic costs for thermoregulation during cold weather events than those inhabiting northern regions (Arlettaz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2000, pp. 1004-1014; see also 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). As a result, we recognize the species' requirement of subtropical climate conditions for its long-term persistence.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        This species is suspected to seasonally vary its use of the northern and southern extent of its known range. This may relate to temperature sensitivity (as described above), different nutritional needs during peak reproductive seasons, or changes in prey availability. Florida bonneted bat detection is positively influenced by Julian date and minimum temperature of the survey night; thus, future monitoring efforts should be focused on warm nights later in the spring to maximize detection probabilities (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, pp. 1589, 1591). Florida bonneted bats were also “more common in areas with higher historical mean annual rainfall but seemed to prefer areas with lower rainfall during the spring” (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, p. 1591). The authors concluded that higher detection probabilities observed were likely a result of increased insect abundance due to increased temperatures, humidity, and precipitation influencing the bats' activity (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, p. 1591). Therefore, we find that seasonal differences and these other climatological conditions, in addition to temperature, likely influence the species' distribution, habitat requirements, and foraging opportunities, thereby affecting its conservation. Differences in these environmental conditions may occur seasonally or on finer temporal scales.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Cover or Shelter</HD>
                    <P>
                        Bats spend over half their lives within their roost environments (Kunz 1982, p. 1). Roosting sites for bats generally include both day and night roosts, and sites for various uses (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         seasonal, maternity, nursery, bachelor roosts). Roosts provide sites for resting, digestion of food, social interaction, mating, rearing of young, as well as providing microclimate stability, protection from predators, and protection from sunlight and adverse weather (Kunz 1982, entire; Ormsbee 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2007, pp. 130-135; Marks and Marks 2008c, p. 4; Dechmann 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2010, pp. 1-7) (see also 
                        <E T="03">Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of Offspring,</E>
                         below). In addition, roosts function as areas where information is shared among colony members for many species of bats (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         the velvety free-tailed bat (
                        <E T="03">Molossus molossus</E>
                        ), see Dechmann 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2010, entire; Bohn, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The availability of suitable roosts is an important limiting factor for most bat species (Humphrey 1975, pp. 341-343). Suitable natural roost sites in south Florida appear limited, and competition for available tree cavities among native and non-native wildlife may be greater now than historically (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Competition for Tree Cavities,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013); also Belwood 1992, p. 220; Kern, Jr., 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012; Ludlow, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012). Consequently, retaining suitable roost structures (trees and snags with cavities or loose bark) throughout the species' range is fundamental to this species' conservation (Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 240). Specifically, more roost structures may be needed to support dispersing subadult males (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Bats in south Florida roost primarily in trees and human-made structures (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 8). Bonneted bats are closely associated with forested areas because of their tree-roosting habits, and old, mature trees are considered essential roosting sites (Robson 1989, p. 2; Belwood 1992, p. 220; Eger 1999, p. 132). However, specific information concerning roost sites was limited at the time of listing (see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Forests and Other Natural Areas, Habitat,</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Life History,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). One of the few historical roost sites used by a small colony of Florida 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35518"/>
                        bonneted bats was a longleaf pine (
                        <E T="03">Pinus palustris</E>
                        ) cavity that had been excavated by a red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (
                        <E T="03">Picoides borealis</E>
                        ) and later enlarged by a pileated woodpecker (
                        <E T="03">Dryocopus pileatus</E>
                        ); the cavity was 4.6 meters (m) (15.1 feet (ft)) above the ground (Belwood 1981, p. 412).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        More recent information suggests that the Florida bonneted bat may prefer large pines (live and dead) with woodpecker activity for potential roosting, at least in some areas (Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2019b; Webb, pers. comm. 2017a). However, other large, tall trees with suitable structure (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         hollows, loose bark) may also be suitable. The species has also been reported to use leaf shafts of royal palm (
                        <E T="03">Roystonea regia</E>
                        ) (Belwood 1992, p. 219) and rocky crevices and outcrops on the ground (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 860; see 
                        <E T="03">Habitat,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Similar roosting habitats (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         use of tree cavities, foliage of palms, crevices) have been reported for closely related species in other areas (Robson 1989, p. 2; Belwood 1992, pp. 219-220).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Since the species was listed in 2013, a total of 19 natural roosts have been located, of which 12 were found in pines (Angell and Thompson 2015, entire; Webb, pers. comm. 2017a; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2019b). As of May 2019, of the 19 roosts found, 6 have fallen or are too damaged to house bats; however, we have used data collected from all known natural roosts to identify common essential features (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         tree height, tree size, cavity height, tree species) (Scofield, pers. comm. 2013g-i; Angell and Thompson 2015, p. 185; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2015b, 2016, 2019a-b; Braun de Torrez et al. 2016, p. 239; Hershberger, pers. comm. 2017; Webb, pers. comm. 2017a; Aldredge, pers. comm. 2018; Miller, pers. comm. 2018; Pitcher, pers. comm. 2019). Based on these natural roosts, Florida bonneted bats appear to roost in trees greater than 10 m (33 ft) in height, greater than 20 cm (8 in) diameter at breast height, with cavities greater than 5 m (16 ft) high off the ground (Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2019c).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat also uses non-natural environments for roosting (see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Parks, Residential Areas, and other Urban Areas,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)) and artificial structures, particularly bat houses (Marks and Marks 2008a, p. 8; Morse 2008, entire; Trokey, pers. comm. 2012a-b; see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Artificial Structures (Bat Houses),</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Many of the known active roosting sites for the species are bat houses (two at a private residence in Lee County; three to seven separate roosts at Babcock-Webb WMA in Charlotte County; seven at or near Zoo Miami in Miami-Dade County) (Myers, pers. comm. 2013a-b, 2014a-d; 2015; Gore, pers. comm. 2017, 2018; Ridgley, pers. comm. 2019).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Bonneted bats have also been found roosting in abandoned and occupied human dwellings in Miami-Dade County (Bohn, pers. comm. 2014; Zambrano, pers. comm. 2015; Hosein and Salazar 2017, entire). In 2017, several roosts were found by tracking tagged bonneted bats; all of these were located in abandoned and occupied houses in urban Miami (Webb, pers. comm. 2017b-e). Another roost was found by tracking a bonneted bat back to a 50 60-ft high utility pole in Polk County (Webb, pers. comm. 2017a). Historically, bonneted bats had been documented to use buildings and barrel tile roofs (Jennings 1958, p. 102; Belwood 1992, pp. 219-220). In Coral Gables, tracked bonneted bats were using utility poles, chimneys, pine trees, and royal palms, but were not found using barrel tile roosts in limited observations (Gore 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2015, entire). Particularly in urban and suburban areas (see Use of Parks, Residential Areas, and other Urban Areas, final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)), the Florida bonneted bat may use bridges, buildings, rock crevices, and other structures resembling natural molossid roosts (Wilkins 1989, pp. 5-6; Milner et al. 1990, p. 3; Best et al. 1996, p. 5; Best et al. 1997, p. 4; Keeley and Tuttle 1999, pp. 9, 28; Avila-Flores and Fenton 2005, entire; Marks and Marks, pers. comm. 2008; Gore et al. 2015).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        More research on the role of bat houses in the conservation of the species is needed (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) 2013, pp. 11-12). The use of such structures by the Florida bonneted bat may be beneficial in some locations, especially where cavity trees are limiting. However, artificial structures may not be sufficient replacements for natural roosts (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         existing dead or hollow trees) due to site fidelity and specific roosting requirements (Ormsbee 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2007, p. 145). Artificial structures may be more likely to be disturbed, may be more prone to vandalism, and may or may not be maintained.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat is suspected to have high roost site fidelity. For example, one natural roost at APAFR remained active (with some periods of inactivity, once due to a nesting northern flicker taking over the cavity) for more than 5 years (Scofield, pers. comm. 2013g-h; 2014a-b; Angell and Thompson 2015, p. 186; Myers, pers. comm. 2018b, Aldredge, pers. comm. 2019a). Several bat houses at Babcock-Webb WMA have been occupied by bonneted bats since 2008 (Myers, pers. comm. 2013a), and a roost in an abandoned house remained active for 20 years (likely with some periods of inactivity), even after an exclusion was conducted (Bohn, pers. comm. 2014; Hosein, pers. comm. 2016; Webb, pers. comm. 2017d; Gore 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2015, p. 183). The loss of a roost site may cause greater hardship to this species than the loss of a roost site for other, less site-faithful species (Ober, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Roost sites are clearly vital resources for this species, and the protection of natural and artificial roost sites in natural areas is essential. Due to the dynamic nature of ecological processes (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         growth and regeneration of forests), forests of different age-classes are needed to ensure that the bat continues to have sufficient roost sites over time. In forested and other natural areas, old, large, mature trees (live or dead) with cavities, hollows, or loose bark provide important natural roosts. Known active roosts include several artificial structures (bat houses), but their capacity to perform all functions of natural roosts is unknown. Therefore, we find that the characteristics and features of natural roost sites are essential for Florida bonneted bat conservation.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of Offspring</HD>
                    <P>
                        As with other aspects of Florida bonneted bat biology, precise site requirements and habitat conditions for successful reproduction and growth are not fully understood. Most natural behaviors related to breeding, reproduction, and carrying for young occur within the Florida bonneted bats' roosts. Optimal roosting habitat depends upon suitable structures (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         tree cavities and hollows) (see 
                        <E T="03">Cover or Shelter,</E>
                         above), but it is at least partly tied to other factors, such as position in the landscape (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         nearby foraging habitat, water sources) (see 
                        <E T="03">Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior,</E>
                         above). Access to sufficient foraging habitat is also critical for the rearing of young (Marks and Marks 2008c, p. 4; see 
                        <E T="03">Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or Physiological Requirements,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Sites supporting the Florida bonneted bats' breeding activities appear to be required year-round (Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 859; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 8; Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017b, p. 556; see 
                        <E T="03">Life History,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013); see 
                        <E T="03">
                            Food, 
                            <PRTPAGE P="35519"/>
                            Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or Physiological Requirements,
                        </E>
                         above). Adults are reproductively active during all three capture sessions (August, December, and April), and non-volant (not capable of flying) pups were found in roosts from May through December (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, pp. 6, 8-9; Gore, pers. comm. 2017; Scofield, pers. comm. 2014b; Angell and Thompson 2015, p. 186; Myers, pers. comm. 2018a; Ridgley, pers. comm. 2015). In the first work on providing demographic estimates for the Florida bonneted bat, Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         (2017b, entire) suggested that recruitment is occurring year-round.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        This species' long reproductive season makes non-volant bonneted bats more vulnerable to disturbance for a greater portion of each year, compared to other bat species (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 8). For example, Florida bonneted bat pups were considered to be very likely present in bat houses during April 16-August 15, and quite possibly present from August 15 through December 31 in bat houses at Babcock-Webb WMA (Gore, pers. comm. 2017). Pups were not likely to be present from January 1 through April 15 (Gore, pers. comm. 2017). Based upon these data, flightless young bonneted bats are vulnerable to disturbance for nearly 9 months of the year in the Charlotte County area. This duration may be further extended in southern portions of the range or curtailed in northern portions of the range.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Most roosting bats are sensitive to human disturbance (Kunz 1982, p. 32), and maternity colonies may be especially intolerant of disturbance (Harvey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         1999, p. 13; see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Inadvertent and Purposeful Impacts from Humans,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). For many species, maternity roosts are commonly used as night roosts by lactating females and newly volant (capable of flying) young (see details in Kunz 1982, p. 39). Due to the apparent limitations in flight for pregnant and lactating females and newly volant young, retaining suitable night roosts and maternity roosts is especially important.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        In addition, in a new study examining social organization at bat houses at Babcock-Webb WMA, researchers found the species roosted in relatively small groups, with an average size of 10 individuals, in a harem structure (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7). The finding of a harem structure is particularly relevant from a conservation standpoint for several reasons, as it suggests: (1) The importance of males and maintenance of social groups; (2) that disturbance of the roost at any time can alter social dynamics and impact reproductive success; (3) that augmenting the number of available small roost sites may be necessary to bolster populations (since harem structure may mean small colony sizes, defensible by a dominant male); and (4) additional roost structures may be necessary for dispersing sub-adult males attempting to establish new harems (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7). Based on the information outlined above, we find that suitable roosting habitat is a year-round necessity for the breeding and rearing of offspring and required for the conservation of this species.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Otherwise Representative of the Historical Geographical and Ecological Distributions of the Species</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat occurs in habitats that are protected from human-generated disturbances. These include Federal, State, local, and private conservation lands and other private (non-conservation) lands that retain natural areas and implement conservation measures benefitting the species. Babcock-Webb WMA and APAFR are two examples of such areas, both supporting populations with known roosting and reproduction. These properties, each approximately 40,470 ha (100,000 ac), represent relatively functional ecosystems, and buffer wildlife from human-related threats and threatening processes. The species does appear somewhat tolerant of some level of human disturbances, the extent to which is unknown. For example, APAFR is an active military base, where bonneted bats are exposed to disturbances such as periodic missions and training exercises, some within a mile of roosts (Aldredge, pers. comm. 2019b). Similarly, individuals occupying bat houses at Babcock-Webb WMA are exposed to, and apparently tolerant of, active land management and recreational activities (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         prescribed fire, hunting). The species also occurs in agricultural areas and in urban, suburban, and residential areas (see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Parks, Residential Areas, and Other Urban Areas,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). We conclude, however, that large patches of habitat, which are relatively free of human disturbances, are necessary for the stability of core populations, and therefore essential to the conservation of this species. Specifically, based on Florida bonneted bats' heavy use of Babcock-Webb WMA and APAFR, we consider areas of habitat 40,470 ha (100,000 ac) or greater as essential to the conservation of this species.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        More specifically, the Florida bonneted bat is dependent upon tall, mature trees and dynamic forest processes (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         growth, decay, regeneration, openings in the canopy, natural fire regimes, and other disturbances such as storms that contribute to roosting structures or make habitat accessible). Healthy forested areas with trees of various age classes and natural processes (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         allowing for trees to grow, mature, decay, and regenerate) help provide the necessary continual supply of potential roosting structure (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         day roosts, night roosts, maternity sites). Other natural habitats with open or semi-open canopy, canopy gaps, and edges help provide open space and relatively uncluttered conditions conducive to foraging, commuting, and general flight. Natural habitat types with diverse plant communities help provide a sufficient prey base and conditions for foraging, dispersal, and other life-history functions. Both natural disturbances (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         fire and storms) and land management actions (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         prescribed fire) help maintain overall habitat suitability and suitable conditions (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         structure). Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         (2018, entire) suggest that bats are attracted to increased availability of insect prey immediately following burns. Based upon their research, they suggest that prescribed fire can have short-term positive effects on bonneted bats and that restoring fire to fire-dependent forests may improve foraging habitat for the species (Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2018, entire). Therefore, we find that fire and other natural disturbance regimes maintain suitable habitat conditions and are essential to the conservation of this species.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Retaining natural habitats will become more important in the future with the anticipated habitat losses from development, climate change, and coastal squeeze, which occurs when habitat is pressed between rising sea levels and coastal development that prevents landward movement (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor A, Land Use Changes and Human Population Growth, Climate Change and Sea Level Rise,</E>
                          
                        <E T="03">Alternative Future Landscape Models and Coastal Squeeze,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The conditions of forests, wetlands, and other land covers are likely to be under increased development pressures and be affected by large-scale changes in climate in the future. Changing habitat conditions due to changes in climate and responses by humans may make the bonneted bat shift from its current range, possibly moving inland or north (Rebelo 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2010, entire; Sherwin 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2012, entire; S. Wolf and J. Lopez, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012). One 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35520"/>
                        model projects that the bonneted bat is likely to experience major range contraction both within Everglades National Park (ENP) and regionally by 2060 (Watling 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2014, p. 28). Similarly, work by Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         (2017a, entire) also suggests that predicted changes in land cover (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         urbanization of the majority of natural and agricultural lands in south, south-central, and southwest Florida) and climate will be threats to the species. We have attempted to account for these influences in our proposed designation of critical habitat by recognizing that habitat composition may change beyond the range of historical variation, and that climate changes may have unpredictable consequences for both peninsular Florida and bonneted bats. This proposed critical habitat designation recognizes that forest management and general land management practices that promote ecosystem health under changing climate conditions will be important for bonneted bat conservation.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Summary of Essential Physical or Biological Features</HD>
                    <P>
                        We derived the specific PBFs essential for the Florida bonneted bat from observations and available studies of this species' habitat, ecology, and life history as described above (see also 
                        <E T="03">Life History</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Habitat,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Where specific information was lacking or deficient, we relied on expert opinion and inferences based upon information from other 
                        <E T="03">Eumops,</E>
                         other molossids, or other comparable species (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         other fast-hawking insectivorous bats) as described above. Additional information can be found in the proposed and final listing rules (77 FR 60750, October 4, 2012; 78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013). We have determined that the following physical or biological features are essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (1) Representative forest types (all age classes) that support the Florida bonneted bat by providing roosting and foraging habitat within its core areas (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         Polk, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and Miami-Dade Counties), including:
                    </P>
                    <P>(a) Pine flatwoods;</P>
                    <P>(b) Scrubby pine flatwoods;</P>
                    <P>(c) Pine rocklands;</P>
                    <P>(d) Royal palm hammocks;</P>
                    <P>(e) Mixed or hardwood hammocks;</P>
                    <P>(f) Cypress;</P>
                    <P>(g) Mixed or hardwood wetlands;</P>
                    <P>(h) Mangroves (mature and pristine);</P>
                    <P>(i) Cabbage palms; and</P>
                    <P>(j) Sand pine scrub.</P>
                    <P>(2) Habitat that provides for roosting and rearing of offspring; such habitat provides structural features for rest, digestion of food, social interaction, mating, rearing of young, protection from sunlight and adverse weather conditions, and cover to reduce predation risks for adults and young, and includes forest and other areas with tall or mature trees and other natural areas with suitable structures, which are generally characterized by:</P>
                    <P>(a) Tall or mature live or dead trees, tree snags, and trees with cavities, hollows, crevices, or loose bark, including, but not limited to, trees greater than 10 m (33 ft) in height, greater than 20 cm (8 in) diameter at breast height, with cavities greater than 5 m (16 ft) high off the ground;</P>
                    <P>
                        (b) High incidence of tall or mature live trees with various deformities (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         large cavities, hollows, broken tops, loose bark, and other evidence of decay);
                    </P>
                    <P>(c) Sufficient open space for Florida bonneted bats to fly; areas may include open or semi-open canopy, canopy gaps and edges, or above the canopy, which provide relatively uncluttered conditions; and/or</P>
                    <P>(d) Rock crevices.</P>
                    <P>(3) Habitat that provides for foraging, which may vary widely across the Florida bonneted bat's range, in accordance with ecological conditions, seasons, and disturbance regimes that influence vegetation structure and prey species distributions. Foraging habitat may be separate and relatively far distances from roosting habitat. Foraging habitat consists of:</P>
                    <P>(a) Sources for drinking water and prey, including open fresh water and permanent or seasonal freshwater wetlands, in natural or rural areas (non-urban areas);</P>
                    <P>
                        (b) Wetland and upland forests, open freshwater wetlands, and wetland and upland shrub (which provide a prey base and suitable foraging conditions (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         open habitat structure));
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (c) Natural or semi-natural habitat patches in urban or residential areas that contribute to prey base and provide suitable foraging conditions (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         open habitat structure); and/or
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (d) The presence and abundance of the bat's prey (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         large, flying insects), in sufficient quantity, availability, and diversity necessary for reproduction, development, growth, and survival.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (4) A dynamic disturbance regime (natural or artificial) (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         fire, hurricanes) that maintains and regenerates forested habitat, including plant communities, open habitat structure, and temporary gaps, which is conducive to promoting a continual supply of roosting sites, prey items, and suitable foraging conditions.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (5) Large patches (more than 40,470 ha (100,000 ac)) of forest and associated natural or semi-natural habitat types that represent functional ecosystems with a reduced influence from humans (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         areas that shield the bat from human disturbance, artificial lighting, habitat loss and degradation).
                    </P>
                    <P>(6) Corridors, consisting of roosting and foraging habitat, that allow for population maintenance and expansion, dispersal, and connectivity among and between geographic areas for natural and adaptive movements, including those necessitated by climate change.</P>
                    <P>(7) A subtropical climate that provides tolerable conditions for the species, such that normal behavior, successful reproduction, and rearing of offspring are possible.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Special Management Considerations or Protection</HD>
                    <P>
                        When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing contain features which are essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection. The recovery of the Florida bonneted bat requires both habitat protection and management, where necessary, to provide sufficient high-quality habitat to allow for population growth and to provide a buffer against threats such as habitat loss, climate change, coastal squeeze, and other threats (see especially 
                        <E T="03">Factor A</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The Service has not drafted a recovery plan for the Florida bonneted bat, but any such plan will likely focus on maintaining and expanding suitable roosting, foraging, and dispersal habitat throughout the species' range and reducing threats. Meeting this goal will require special management considerations or protection of the PBFs including passive (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         allowing natural processes to occur without intervention) and active (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         taking actions to restore habitat conditions or address threats) management.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The types of management or protections that may be required to achieve these goals and maintain the PBFs essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat in occupied areas vary across the range of the species. In some areas of bat habitat, particularly in wetland forests, open freshwater wetlands, and areas of open water, efforts may need to focus primarily on protection of the essential features (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         habitat conservation, conserving trees 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35521"/>
                        and snags, allowing natural processes to occur without intervention). However, other areas such as upland forests and degraded natural areas may need both protection and more proactive land management. For example, in coastal and fire-dependent regions of the species' range, habitat conditions may be more dynamic, and more active management may be required to reduce risks to the essential PBFs from wildfire, inadequate fire regimes, nonnative invasive plants, competition for tree cavities, pesticides, artificial lighting, inadvertent impacts from humans, hurricanes and storm surges, and sea-level rise.
                    </P>
                    <P>The PBFs essential to the conservation of this species may require special management considerations or protection to reduce the following threats:</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Habitat Loss</HD>
                    <P>
                        Habitat loss, degradation, and modification from human population growth and associated development (including infrastructure and energy development) and agriculture have impacted the Florida bonneted bat and are expected to further curtail its limited range (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor A,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013); Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, entire). Based on the expected rates of human population growth and urbanization in southern Florida, nearly all agricultural and private natural lands are predicted to be converted to developed land by 2060 (Zwick and Carr 2006). Of this, approximately 7.5 percent of the area in our proposed units (over 44,718 ha (110,500 ac)) are predicted to be converted to developed land by 2070 (Carr and Zwick 2016, entire). The species occurs, in part, on publicly owned lands that are managed for conservation, ameliorating some of these threats (see 
                        <E T="03">Document Availability,</E>
                         Supporting Documents, above). However, any unknown extant populations of the bat or suitable habitat on private lands or non-conservation public lands are vulnerable to habitat loss and fragmentation. Retaining a habitat network of large and diverse natural areas for conservation purposes in a spatial configuration throughout the Florida bonneted bat's range and actively managing those lands will likely be essential to conservation. In addition, conservation efforts on private lands can help reduce the threats of habitat loss, increasing the potential for long-term survival.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Natural roosting habitat appears to be limiting, and competition for tree cavities is high (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Competition for Tree Cavities,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). To help conserve the Florida bonneted bat, efforts should be made to retain tall trees, cavity trees, trees with hollows or other decay, and snags wherever possible to protect habitat, reduce competition for suitable roosts, and bolster or expand populations within the species' known range (Angell and Thompson 2015, p. 187; Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, pp. 235, 240; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7). The use of artificial structures for the Florida bonneted bat may also be beneficial in some locations, especially where roosting structures are lacking or deficient (see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Artificial Structures (Bat Houses),</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Substantial losses in suitable foraging habitats are expected to occur in the coming decades as natural and agricultural areas are converted to other uses and as areas become urbanized (Carr and Zwick 2016, entire; Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, p. 1591). Conservation of natural and semi-natural habitats and restoration with native plants is imperative to help maintain sufficient prey base. Natural habitats conducive to insect diversity should be protected and any pesticides should be used with caution (see 
                        <E T="03">Life History,</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Pesticides and Contaminants,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Climate Change and Sea-Level Rise</HD>
                    <P>
                        The effects resulting from climate change, including sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and coastal squeeze, are expected to become severe in the future and result in additional habitat losses, including the loss of roost sites and foraging habitat (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor A,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013). Within the species' range, low-lying areas along the coast are most vulnerable to inundation, and additional areas are likely to experience changes in plant species composition (decline in forested habitat such as cabbage palm forests, pine rockland, and coastal hardwood hammocks). Occupied Florida bonneted bat habitat located near the coast in south Florida (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         Collier, Lee, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Charlotte, Desoto, and Sarasota Counties) will be vulnerable to inundation and/or saltwater intrusion as sea levels rise. An estimated 16.4 percent (97,832 ha (241,748 ac)) of the occupied habitat area we propose for designation is projected to be inundated by 6 feet of salt water around 2070 (sea level rise plus tidal flooding; Sweet 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017, entire; Sweet 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2018, entire; Sweet 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2019, entire). Although we are unable to accurately estimate the extent of other climate change-related effects, we expect additional occupied habitat will be impacted by saltwater intrusion, drier conditions, and increased variability in precipitation, likely resulting in changes to vegetation composition and prey availability, decreased forest regeneration, and potential increases in wildfire frequency, severity, and scale (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor A, Land Use Changes and Human Population Growth, Climate Change and Sea Level Rise,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The trend toward higher temperatures and lower rainfall (or shifts in rainfall patterns) could result in the degradation of wetlands and other important open-water habitats, or complete loss of affected foraging areas if drought-like conditions persist. Actual impacts may be greater or less than anticipated based upon high variability of factors involved (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         sea-level rise, human population growth) and assumptions made.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        As a result of these impacts and other causes of habitat loss and degradation, PBFs may no longer be available in some areas, and the amount of suitable occupied Florida bonneted bat habitat is likely to shrink dramatically in the future. Habitat loss from sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion will be greatest in areas closer to the coast and is likely to result in the loss of some bonneted bat populations, such as those in eastern Miami-Dade County, reducing the species' ability to withstand catastrophic events (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         redundancy). We anticipate additional populations near the coast will be reduced in size, such as those in Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and remaining areas in Miami-Dade Counties, resulting in decreased overall health and fitness (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         resiliency) of those populations. Further, most of the remaining bat populations face similar threats and pressures (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         development pressure, effects of climate change, coastal squeeze, droughts, hurricanes) that are expected to reduce their resiliency. This limits the species' ability to recover from population declines, when many populations are similarly affected. However, we lack certainty as to the severity of impacts the effects of sea level rise may have on the bat's critical habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Directly addressing sea-level rise is beyond the control of landowners or managers. However, while landowners or land managers may not be able prevent these events, they may be able to respond with management or protection. Management actions or activities that could ameliorate the effects of sea-level rise on the Florida bonneted bat include providing protection of inland or higher elevation 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35522"/>
                        suitable habitats that are predicted to be unaffected or less affected by sea-level rise, or habitat restoration or enhancement of these areas. Conserving areas in the northern portion of the range may be particularly important, as bats may respond to increases in temperatures and other changes in the environment, possibly becoming more heavily dependent upon these areas in the future.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Land Management Practices</HD>
                    <P>
                        While land management practices are intended to mimic natural processes and benefit native species like the Florida bonneted bat by maintaining habitat quality, these activities can result in inadvertent negative impacts. For example, removal of old or live trees with cavities or hollows during activities associated with forest management (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         timber management including tree removal/thinning/pruning), fuel reduction, prescribed fire, non-native or invasive species treatment, habitat restoration, or trail maintenance may inadvertently remove roost sites, if such sites are not known (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor A, Land Management Practices,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Also, while fire is a vital component in maintaining suitable habitat (Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2018, entire), cavity-roosting bats are generally susceptible to fire effects, and even a single, localized fire event could potentially impact individuals (Carter 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2000, p. 140). Loss of an active roost or removal during critical life-history stages (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         when females are pregnant or rearing young) can have severe ramifications, considering the species' apparent small population size and low fecundity (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Effects of Small Population Size, Isolation, and Other Factors,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Risk from fire or other forest management practices may be minimized by conducting activities outside the bat's breeding season, though disturbance to roost sites at any time of the year may alter social dynamics and reproductive success (Blumstein 2010, pp. 665-666; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Conversely, forest management can help maintain important roosting and foraging habitat (see 
                        <E T="03">Use of Forests and Other Natural Areas,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)), and, in fact, a lack of forest management, including a lack of prescribed fire, can be detrimental to the species. Management practices that include retaining large-cavity trees and snags, wherever possible, may help reduce competition for tree cavities (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Competition for Tree Cavities,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)), enhance roosting opportunities, and help promote survival and the potential for population expansion over the long term. Prescribed fire has been found to have short-term positive effects on Florida bonneted bats, and restoring fire to fire-dependent forests may improve foraging habitat for this species (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         alter vegetation and prey base; create openings and alter structure) or create snags (Carter 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2000, p. 139; Boyles and Aubrey 2006, entire; Lacki 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2009, entire; Armitage and Ober 2012, entire; FWC 2013, pp. 9-11; Ober and McCleery 2014, pp. 1-3; Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2018, entire).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Wind Energy</HD>
                    <P>
                        Wind power is one of the fastest growing sectors of the energy industry (Horn 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2008, p. 123; Cryan and Barclay 2009, p. 1330), and the development of wind energy facilities in Florida may be of particular concern for the Florida bonneted bat as demand increases (see 
                        <E T="03">Proposed Wind Energy Facilities,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Wind turbines kill large number of bats across North America, through direct contact with blades or towers as well as due to barotrauma (which involves tissue damage to air-containing structures such as lungs, caused by rapid or excessive pressure changes that can result when wind turbine blades create zones of low pressure as air flows over them). Wind turbine facilities are being planned for sites east and west of Lake Okeechobee, and wind energy development companies have indicated that areas around Lake Okeechobee are the most suitable sites in Florida for wind development (Tucker, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012). If successfully developed, additional sites could be proposed, increasing the risk of impacts from wind energy to the Florida bonneted bat (Tucker, 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        While bat fatalities from wind energy facilities are well documented, potential impacts to the Florida bonneted bat are difficult to evaluate at this time, partly due to the uncertainty involving many factors (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         location of facilities, operations). Certain aspects of the species' status and life history may increase vulnerability to impacts from wind energy facilities. The species' small population and low fecundity make any additional potential sources of mortality cause for concern. The species' high and strong flight capabilities and fast-hawking foraging behavior may increase risk. Conversely, as the species is non-migratory, potential impacts from wind energy facilities may not be as great in magnitude as perhaps other bat species that are migratory. Implementation of the Service's land-based wind energy guidelines may also help to avoid and minimize some impacts (Service 2012, pp. 1-71).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Environmental Stochasticity</HD>
                    <P>
                        Hurricanes, storm surges, and other catastrophic and stochastic events are of significant concern (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Environmental Stochasticity</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Aspects of the Species' Life History and Climate Change Implications,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). In 2017 alone, at least four known roost trees were impacted by Hurricane Irma. While landowners or land managers cannot prevent these events, they may be able to respond with protection or management that can help reduce some effects or facilitate recovery from these events. Retention of large trees and snags wherever possible in multiple locations can help provide valuable roosting habitat throughout the species' range (Braun de Torrez 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, pp. 235, 240; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7). Management actions or activities that could enhance forest recovery following storms may include hand or mechanical removal of damaged vegetation or prescribed fire, if or when conditions are suitable. If large trees, cavity trees, trees with hollows or other decay, or snags need to be removed due to safety issues, visual or other inspection should occur to ensure that active roosts are not removed in this process.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Artificial structures could potentially help provide roosting opportunities in areas impacted by stochastic events or where suitable natural roosts are lacking or deficient. More research on the role of bat houses in bonneted bat conservation is needed, especially given the bat's social structure (FWC 2013, pp. 11-12; Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, p. 7). If used, bat houses should be appropriately designed, placed, maintained, and monitored; such structures may also need to be reinforced and duplicated to prevent loss. If an occupied area is severely impacted, causing major losses of suitable natural roosts, the use of artificial structures could be explored as one possible option to help regain lost roosting capacity.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Pesticides and Contaminants</HD>
                    <P>
                        More study is needed to fully assess the risk that pesticides and contaminants pose to the Florida bonneted bat (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Pesticides and Contaminants,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Although data are lacking, the species may be exposed to a variety of compounds through multiple routes of exposure. Areas with intensive pesticide activity 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35523"/>
                        may not support an adequate food base. Foraging habitat can be enhanced, in part, by limiting the use of pesticides, including agrochemicals (chemicals used in agriculture) (Russo and Jones 2003, pp. 206-207; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2003, pp. 991-992; Wickramasinghe 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2004, entire). While exposure to some contaminants (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         mercury) may be beyond the realm of what individuals or agencies can rectify, risks from pesticides can be partially reduced at the local level. For example, landowners and land managers can help reduce some risks of exposure and improve foraging conditions for the Florida bonneted bat by avoiding or limiting use of insecticides (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         mosquito control, agricultural), wherever possible, and especially in areas known to be occupied by the Florida bonneted bat. An increased occurrence of bonneted bats was found in agricultural areas and was attributed to a combination of insect abundance in these areas and the species' ability to forage in open spaces (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, pp. 1589, 1591). It is reasonable to assume that prey base (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         availability, abundance, and diversity of insects) would be more plentiful with reduction of insecticides, where possible. If pesticides cannot be avoided, ways to reduce impacts should be explored. Protecting natural and semi-natural habitats that support insect diversity can also improve foraging conditions and contribute to conservation.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Ecological Light Pollution</HD>
                    <P>
                        The Florida bonneted bat's behavioral response to ecological light pollution has not been examined; thus, the effects are not known (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Ecological Light Pollution,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The effects of artificial lighting on other bats and their prey have been partially studied. Artificial lighting may affect insect abundance or availability and prey base, thereby altering foraging conditions and community structure. Artificial lighting can also alter the normal movements and behaviors of bat species, negatively affecting the energy reserves of individuals (Longcore and Rich 2004, pp. 193-195). Thus, at this time, we consider ecological light pollution a potential threat to the Florida bonneted bat and its habitat. Management actions or activities that could ameliorate ecological light pollution include: Avoiding and minimizing the use of artificial lighting, retaining natural light conditions, and promoting the use of environmentally friendly lighting practices to minimize impacts to wildlife.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Inadvertent and Purposeful Impacts From Humans</HD>
                    <P>
                        Inadvertent or purposeful impacts by humans caused by intolerance or lack of awareness (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         removal of bats, landscaping activities, and bridge or infrastructure maintenance) can lead to mortality or destruction and disturbances to roosts during sensitive times (maternity season) (see 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Inadvertent and Purposeful Impacts From Humans,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Single or repeated disturbances to roosts or disturbances at sensitive times may cause abandonment or other negative impacts. The Florida bonneted bat may be somewhat tolerant of human disturbances, in some environments, but the extent of that tolerance is unknown. Agencies, land managers, and landowners can help avoid impacts to roosting habitat by implementing some of the following proactive or mitigative measures: Raising awareness of the species' abilities to use artificial structures as roosts; conserving natural roosting sites, including forested habitat and areas with mature trees; minimizing disturbance of roosting sites during sensitive times of the year; using care during landscaping if vegetation provides suitable or potential roosts; implementing protective measures when conducting bridge maintenance and repair; using care when replacing or repairing utility poles; and employing other best management practices, whenever possible.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Many species of bats use highway structures either as day or night roosts (Keeley and Tuttle 1999, p. 9). Although 
                        <E T="03">Eumops</E>
                         has not been documented to use bridges or culverts, the genus can potentially use such structures (Keeley and Tuttle 1999, p. 28; Marks and Marks, pers. comm. 2008). If the Florida bonneted bat is found to use these structures, agencies could explore opportunities for creating roosting habitat in new or existing highway structures, when projects are planned and as repairs on infrastructure are needed (Keeley and Tuttle 1999, pp. 18-20). Roadways with structures passing through public conservation lands may be especially suitable for such habitat enhancement projects (Keeley and Tuttle 1999, p. 18). Retrofitting projects can help enhance habitat for bats, can be inexpensive, and can also benefit agriculture, as bats play important roles in arthropod suppression, helping to naturally control agricultural pests and reduce the need for pesticide use (Keely and Tuttle 1999, pp. 18-20; Jones 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2009, pp. 97-98; Kunz 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2011, entire). In addition to minimizing environmental damage from infrastructure projects, other mitigation may include providing alternative roosts on-site or artificial structures off-site (Keely and Tuttle 1999, p. 21).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Occupancy at the Time of Listing</HD>
                    <P>
                        The geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing is defined at 50 CFR 424.02 as an area that may generally be delineated around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically, but not solely by vagrant individuals). To make reasonable determinations about occupancy, we used all data and information available on the Florida bonneted bat (see also 
                        <E T="03">Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior,</E>
                         above). The best available scientific data for Florida bonneted bat occurrences date from 2003, reflecting the beginning of recent survey efforts. The Florida bonneted bat appears to have a relatively long lifespan, assuming a lifespan of 10 to 20 years for bats of this size (Wilkinson and South 2002, entire). Thus, bats documented between 2003 and 2013 may still be alive and using the general locations where originally located. Adult Florida bonneted bats appear to also have high site fidelity (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, pp. 4-7), and more recent data are consistent with those from previously surveyed areas. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude these areas were still inhabited by bonneted bats when the species was listed in 2013 (see also 
                        <E T="03">Occupied and Potential Occupied Areas,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). Therefore, we considered areas with documented presence of bonneted bats since 2003 (11 years prior to its listing) as occupied at the time of listing.
                    </P>
                    <P>For this same reason, we considered areas with documented presence of bonneted bats from October 2013 through 2019 as occupied at the time of listing. Again, due to the species' life span and high site fidelity, it is reasonable to conclude that these areas found to be occupied in 2013 to 2019 would have been inhabited by bonneted bats when the species was listed in 2013. The confirmed presence data received after listing (through 2019) corresponded well with previous data and generally reinforced our understanding of occupied areas.</P>
                    <P>
                        We also conclude that areas surrounding point locations of confirmed presences at time of listing 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35524"/>
                        were occupied by bonneted bats at that time (see also detailed discussion in 
                        <E T="03">Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior,</E>
                         above). Due to the species' morphological characteristics and flight capabilities, bonneted bats use areas within reasonable flight distances from the locations where they were recorded or otherwise documented. Data from satellite-tagged Florida bonneted bats (few bats inhabiting one site) indicated that individuals foraged as far as 39 kilometers (km) (24 miles (mi)) from their capture sites (Ober 2016, p. 3; Webb, pers. comm. 2018a-b). However, roost locations (the center point of bat activities) related to these data were unknown. Therefore, as a conservative estimate of foraging distance, we used a 19-km (12-mi) radius from documented presences (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         assuming a normal distribution of activity 0 to 24 miles from the center point). Although flight distances appear to differ based upon sex and season (Webb, pers. comm. 2018b), and may vary based on habitat quality and available food resources, for the purposes of this effort, based on the best available science and to conservatively target areas most essential to the species' recovery, we considered areas within a 19-km (12-mi) distance or radius from confirmed presences to be occupied at the time of listing.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        We further acknowledge that areas for which we lack data may also have been occupied at the time of listing. Limited confirmed presence data (see proposed and final listing rules (77 FR 60750, October 4, 2012; 78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013) are confounded by the difficulties in detection, due in part to the following factors: The species' general rarity; aspects of the species' ecology (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         flies high, travels long distances, is nocturnal); limitations in survey equipment (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         recording distance of acoustic devices), design (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         lack of randomization (selection of a random sample)), or effort (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         insufficient listening periods, recordings not taken from sunset to sunrise); and other limitations (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         large areas not surveyed due to lack of resources or access, surveys primarily conducted on public lands) (see also 
                        <E T="03">Acoustical Survey Efforts as Indicators of Rarity,</E>
                         proposed and final listing rules; Summary of Comments and Recommendations, final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Overall, (1) bonneted bats are rare on the landscape, meaning they are difficult to detect; (2) bonneted bats are elusive (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         they fly high and fast over large distances) and nocturnal by nature, again making them difficult to detect; and (3) repeated, intensive, and systematic surveys on lands within the species' range are generally lacking, meaning that a lack of detection does not necessarily indicate the species' absence (given the data available). Therefore, there is uncertainty as to whether or not other areas (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         those areas not surveyed and those areas that have been surveyed but lack confirmed presence data) were also occupied at the time the bonneted bat was listed. Large expanses of the bonneted bat's range have not been systematically surveyed or, if surveyed, they have not been surveyed rigorously enough to confirm absence (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         surveyed on a single or partial night, insufficient number of acoustic devices used, survey not repeated). We recognize that the available occurrence data, largely obtained through acoustical surveys, are limited in several regards (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         not randomized, conducted largely on public lands, employed insufficient listening periods, had different detection rates, used different devices and methods, large areas not surveyed). Due to the survey limitations and constraints, it should be noted that confirmed presences were more likely to be detected in preferred habitats, on public lands, and in accessible areas. Due to both the limited number of surveys undertaken and the overall lack of rigor (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         effort insufficient to fully document presence or suggest absence), it is reasonable to assume that other areas where suitable habitat exists within the geographic range may also have been occupied at the time of listing. However, for the purposes of this proposed designation, we relied on confirmed presence data including a radius of areas the bat uses around those points.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat</HD>
                    <P>As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best scientific data available to designate critical habitat. In accordance with the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), we review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of the species and identify specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing and any specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species that could be considered for designation as critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>
                        We are proposing to designate critical habitat units that we have determined, based on the best available scientific and commercial information, to be occupied at the time of listing (see 
                        <E T="03">Occupancy at the Time of Listing</E>
                        , above). Thus, the areas being proposed for designation contain one or more of the PBFs that are essential to support life-history processes of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection pursuant to section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. As a highly social species, the Florida bonneted bat likely exhibits a metapopulation life-history model (a group of spatially separated populations that interact at some level), and although the species appears to exhibit strong roost site-fidelity, individuals within populations can and do move through suitable habitat to take advantage of changing conditions (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         availability of prey, roost sites) in a dynamic fashion through space and time (Ober 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2016, entire). We included areas that are expected to help maintain suitable roosting habitat and that include certain forested features we believe provide for connectivity and dispersal between geographic areas and/or subpopulations (see 
                        <E T="03">Population Estimates and Status</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Effects of Small Population Size, Isolation, and Other Factors,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). However, at any given moment, not all areas within each unit are being used by the species because, by definition, individuals within metapopulations move in space and time. Therefore, within the current range of the species, to the best of our knowledge, some portions of these units may or may not be actively used by individuals, colonies, or extant bat subpopulations or populations, but we consider these areas to be occupied at the scale of the geographic range of the species.
                    </P>
                    <P>For this proposed rule, we employed the following basic steps to delineate potential critical habitat (detailed methods follow below):</P>
                    <P>
                        (1) We compiled all available data from confirmed observations, acoustical recordings, and other records of the Florida bonneted bat (see 
                        <E T="03">Data Sources,</E>
                         below).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (2) Using the best available science, including confirmed presence data from 2003 through 2014, and reasonable inferences regarding home range sizes and flight distances of other 
                        <E T="03">Eumops</E>
                         and other comparable species, we conducted habitat analyses to better understand Florida bonneted bat habitat use at multiple spatial scales (see 
                        <E T="03">Habitat Analyses,</E>
                         below).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (3) Based on the results of our habitat analyses and using the best available scientific information, including confirmed presence data from 2003 to 2019, and foraging distance data, we evaluated occupied areas for suitability, identified areas containing the PBFs that 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35525"/>
                        may require special management considerations or protection, and circumscribed boundaries of potential proposed occupied critical habitat units (see 
                        <E T="03">Mapping Critical Habitat Units,</E>
                         below).
                    </P>
                    <P>Specific criteria and methodology used to determine proposed critical habitat unit boundaries are discussed below.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Data Sources</HD>
                    <P>
                        For our habitat analyses and unit delineations, we used confirmed presence data from 2003 through 2019 (see 
                        <E T="03">Occupancy at the Time of Listing</E>
                        , above). Only confirmed presences (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         not suspected bat calls) with specific location information were used. Only data for which we had a high degree of confidence and detailed location information were used. As such, we included data from the following sources:
                    </P>
                    <P>(a) Range-wide surveys conducted in 2006-2007, to determine the status of the Florida bonneted bat following the 2004 hurricane season, and follow-up surveys in 2008 (Marks and Marks 2008a, pp. 1-16 and appendices; 2008b, pp. 1-6);</P>
                    <P>(b) Surveys conducted in 2008 along the Kissimmee River and Lake Wales Ridge, as part of bat conservation and land management efforts (Marks and Marks 2008c, pp. 1-28; 2008d, pp. 1-21; Morse 2008, p. 2);</P>
                    <P>(c) Surveys conducted within BCNP in 2003 and 2007 (Snow, pers. comm. 2012f), and surveys conducted in BCNP in 2012-2014 (Arwood, pers. comm. 2012a-b, 2013a-c; 2014a-d);</P>
                    <P>
                        (d) Surveys conducted in 2011-2012 in ENP (Snow, pers. comm. 2012b-e; 
                        <E T="03">in litt.</E>
                         2012);
                    </P>
                    <P>(e) Surveys conducted in 2010-2012, to fill past gaps and better define the northern and southern extent of the species' range (Marks and Marks 2012, entire);</P>
                    <P>(f) Surveys conducted at APAFR in 2013 (Scofield, pers. comm. 2013a-f);</P>
                    <P>(g) Surveys conducted at FPNWR in 2013 (Maehr 2013, entire; Maehr, pers. comm. 2013b);</P>
                    <P>(h) Surveys conducted at Zoo Miami, Larry and Penny Thompson Park, and Martinez Preserve in 2012 and 2013 (Ridgley, pers. comm. 2013a-d; 2014a-c); and</P>
                    <P>(i) Surveys conducted at PSSF, multiple years (Smith, pers. comm. 2013).</P>
                    <P>
                        Additional details regarding the above surveys are described in the proposed and final listing rules (77 FR 60750; 78 FR 61004). All relevant new occurrence data received since the final rule was published (October 2, 2013) through May 2014 were also considered in the habitat analyses. The most significant of these was the discovery of an active natural roost site, within an enlarged cavity in a live longleaf pine at APAFR (Scofield, pers. comm. 2013g-i; 2014a-b; Angell and Thompson 2015, entire) (see specifics in 
                        <E T="03">Cover or Shelter,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        More recent occurrence data (collected June 2014 through 2019) confirmed earlier data and further informed our understanding of how bats use their landscape. For the reasons stated above (see 
                        <E T="03">Occupied at the Time of Listing</E>
                        ), we conclude it is reasonable to assume that bats occupying specific areas in 2014 to 2019, occupied those areas at the time of listing in 2013. We incorporated these data into our determination of which areas may contain the PBFs. Together, this information guided our mapping of critical habitat units, and were used to verify areas of high-quality habitat we previously identified. These data included the following:
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (a) Range-wide surveys conducted in 2014 and 2015 to determine Florida bonneted bat distribution and habitat use (Bailey 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2017a, entire);
                    </P>
                    <P>(b) Ongoing telemetry studies to identify natural roost sites and foraging habits (Webb, pers. comm. 2017a-e; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2019a-e);</P>
                    <P>(c) Surveys conducted from 2014 to 2019 on private lands by private consultants (unpublished data, various sources); and</P>
                    <P>(d) Surveys conducted from 2014 to 2019 within conservation and public lands (unpublished data, various sources; including, for example, APAFR, BCNP, FPNWR, FSPSP).</P>
                    <P>For our habitat analyses and subsequent unit delineations, we used a variety of data sources that provide information regarding land cover/habitat type and condition, as described below. We obtained vegetation cover types and land uses from the Florida Land Use and Cover Classification System (FLUCCS) GIS database (FWC and Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 2015). FLUCCS categories were grouped to condense more than 100 different vegetation cover/land use classes into 10 major land cover categories. These included: Wetland forest, wetland shrub, upland forest, upland shrub, open freshwater wetlands, saltwater wetlands, grasslands/open land, agricultural, urban, and water. We used 0.8-km (0.5-mi) grid cells to examine land cover types within south and central peninsular Florida, encompassing the entirety of the species' known historical, current, and suspected range. Percentages of each of the 10 major land cover categories in each 0.8-km (0.5-mi) grid cell were calculated using the area tool in ArcGIS; these were then used for a series of habitat analyses.</P>
                    <P>
                        We used available RCW data layers (mainly active and inactive cavity trees), based upon suggestions from FWC and evidence indicating that Florida bonneted bats use enlarged woodpecker cavities for roosting (Angell and Thompson 2015, entire) (see 
                        <E T="03">Cover or Shelter,</E>
                         above). Although Florida bonneted bats likely use various structures for roosting, active and inactive RCW cavity trees were selected as an appropriate indicator to evaluate potential roosting habitat (especially in areas where bat surveys were lacking). RCW cavity trees are also a good surrogate for roosting habitat because the RCW is tracked due to its State and Federal status (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         agencies have current and reliable data on RCWs, but not necessarily other non-listed cavity nesters). Data included locations of RCW cavity trees from various sources. Where in-house data were outdated, more recent information was obtained through the assistance of FWC and other agencies. This included information from the following locations and sources:
                    </P>
                    <P>• Babcock-Webb WMA—locations where Florida bonneted bats were recorded near RCW clusters (J. Myers, pers. comm. 2013b);</P>
                    <P>• Corbett WMA—locations of active and inactive RCW trees (P. Miles, pers. comm. 2013);</P>
                    <P>• DuPuis Wildlife and Environmental Area—locations of active and inactive RCW trees (V. Sparling, pers. comm. 2014);</P>
                    <P>• Big Cypress WMA—locations of active and inactive RCW trees (R. Scott, pers. comm. 2014); and</P>
                    <P>
                        • PSSF—locations of RCW cavity trees (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         active and inactive cavity trees, enlarged cavity entrance trees, dead standing cavity trees) (Sowell, pers. comm. 2013, 2014). For areas within BCNP and ENP, we also used areas searched for the ivory-billed woodpecker (
                        <E T="03">Campephilus principalis</E>
                        ) and other woodpeckers (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         areas that contained large-cavity trees) as part of Cornell University's study (Lammertink 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2010, entire).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        We used ESRI ArcGIS online basemap aerial imagery (collected December, 2010) and Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quadrangles (1-m true color; collected 2004) of select areas to cross-check FLUCCS and ensure the presence of PBFs. We used the most recent county-supplied imagery datasets available at the time of the habitat analysis. To identify high-value areas (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         high-
                        <PRTPAGE P="35526"/>
                        quality habitat expected to have conservation value now or in the future), we used the FNAI Florida Conservation Lands dataset. In Miami-Dade County, we also used the Institute for Regional Conservation's Natural Forest Community delineation, exclusive of ENP (IRC 2006). Lastly, we used the most recent available county parcels layers for regions intersecting critical habitat units to identify ownership.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Habitat Analyses</HD>
                    <P>
                        We conducted a series of GIS analyses to better understand habitat use along different spatial scales (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         across the landscape, by geographic region, and by specific locations (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         natural roost site). To best represent those habitat conditions which provide the PBFs for Florida bonneted bats, we first identified four geographic regions to focus on in our habitat analysis based on confirmed presence data: (1) West (Charlotte/Lee Counties), (2) southwest (Collier/Monroe/Lee/Hendry Counties), (3) southeast (Miami-Dade County), and (4) north-central (Polk/Okeechobee and adjacent counties). These geographic regions may represent subpopulations or multiple subpopulations within a metapopulation (see 
                        <E T="03">Population Estimates and Status</E>
                         and 
                        <E T="03">Factor E, Effects of Small Population Size, Isolation, and Other Factors,</E>
                         final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Based on limited tracking data (Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2015a; Ober 2015, p. 3) indicating that, in some situations, bonneted bats may spend more time within 1.6-km (1-mi) of their roosts, we applied this distance as a radius around confirmed presences to analyze habitat types. Habitat within these circular areas around Florida bonneted bat presence locations was analyzed based on FLUCCS land cover types, which we grouped and applied to 0.8-km (0.5-mi) grid cells (see 
                        <E T="03">Data Sources,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Using this approach, we identified the top five cover types in terms of area (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         highest percentage of total area) as being the most important cover types, based upon limited data and analyses. In natural landscapes, wetland forest, open freshwater wetland, wetland shrub, upland forest, and upland shrub comprised the top five land cover types when examining habitats within 1.6 km (1 mi) of confirmed presences. When analyzing habitat within the geographic regions, top habitat types were similar, although the most prevalent land cover type varied based on the geographic area. In the vicinity of the one active natural roost known at the time of our analysis, upland forest and upland shrub comprised approximately 90 percent of the surrounding habitat, while at another select location (Annette's Pond in BCNP), wetland forest represented over half of the habitat within 1.6 km (1 mi).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Mapping Critical Habitat Units</HD>
                    <P>
                        Using results from our habitat analyses, and available occurrence and movement data, we evaluated habitat suitability for the Florida bonneted bat. This species likely uses roosting sites that are located within reasonable distances from their confirmed presences (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         “central-place foraging”; Rainho and Palmeirim 2011). Similarly, given their social nature, bonneted bats are presumed to use habitats near where they have been detected to perform other activities; hence these habitats are considered important to fulfill essential life functions. It should be recognized that actual habitat used by Florida bonneted bats may be removed in time and space from point locations identified during one-time surveys. The underlying uncertainty associated with point encounters means that it is difficult, and possibly inaccurate, to use bounded home ranges from empirical data when site-specific information regarding habitat use at surveyed areas is lacking. Foraging, roosting, breeding, dispersal, emigration, and recolonization require movements through habitats across generations, which may venture well beyond estimated single-night or single-season home ranges or movement distances. To account for this, we considered the distribution of suitable habitat features in relation to confirmed presence locations and the ability of bats to move along good habitat corridors. It is evident that other 
                        <E T="03">Eumops</E>
                         and other molossids can, over the course of a night, move through several kilometers of habitat (if the intervening habitat or conditions are suitable) (Tibbitts 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2002, entire; Ober 2015, p. 3; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2015a; Ober 2016, p. 3; Webb, pers. comm. 2018a-b). Habitat connectivity is particularly important for the Florida bonneted bat given its limited geographic range and need for dispersal and expansion as the species responds to numerous threats.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Therefore, given observed flight distances from data available on comparable species at the time of our habitat analyses, we first evaluated natural habitats within 12 km (7.5 mi) of confirmed detections from 2003 through May 2014 to guide our identification of important occupied areas. This radius was selected as a conservative distance representing the midpoint of 24 km (15 mi), which we determined to be a reasonable estimate of foraging distance based on one-way distance data for related and comparable species available at the time of our habitat analyses (Tibbitts 
                        <E T="03">et al.</E>
                         2002, p. 11; Gore, pers. comm. 2013). While more recent data indicate bonneted bats can fly much farther than this (Ober 2016, p. 3; Webb, pers. comm. 2018a-b; see also 
                        <E T="03">Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior</E>
                         and Occupancy at the Time of Listing, above), we chose to retain the 12-km (7.5-mi) radius as a more suitable analysis distance to focus conservation of high-quality foraging habitat nearer to roosts. Natural habitats within this radius of confirmed presences were evaluated unless some other habitat parameter (as outlined in the PBFs above) suggested low habitat utility or practical dispersal barriers (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         urban habitat, areas devoid of natural cover or insects). In some cases, high-quality habitats beyond the 12-km (7.5-mi) radius were included, if habitats were contiguous and adjoining (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         adjoining forest within BCNP) or a natural corridor.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        To identify areas containing the PBFs for Florida bonneted bats that may require special management considerations or protection, we applied the findings of our habitat analyses to evaluate occupied habitat using both FLUCCS and images from aerial photography in GIS. We determined that grid cells (see 
                        <E T="03">Data Sources,</E>
                         above) with at least 80 percent of the top five cover types (see 
                        <E T="03">Habitat Analyses,</E>
                         above) qualified as suitable habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. This threshold was chosen after comparing with other values over 50 percent (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         values representing grid cells having a majority of habitat within the top five cover types). We found that despite a large amount of overlap between these values, using the relatively less inclusive 80-percent threshold resulted in the best balance of identifying high-quality habitat that have PBFs and excluding low-quality areas that do not, based on site-specific knowledge. Thus, concentrations of grid cells that contained at least 80 percent of the top five important cover types within each geographic region were generally retained as areas that may contain PBFs. We included areas of water within the 12-km (7.5-mi) radius as well as aggregations of adjacent forested areas that were contiguous yet beyond 12 km (7.5 mi), if these areas contained significant upland or wetland forest (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         met 80-percent threshold, using applied 0.8-km (0.5-mi) grids). We also 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35527"/>
                        considered RCW data and conservation lands, where applicable (see 
                        <E T="03">Data Sources,</E>
                         above). Using this approach, we identified aggregations of important high-quality, mixed habitat types in geographic regions. We subsequently evaluated these areas of high-quality habitat using additional occurrence data (June 2014 through 2019) and found a high degree of overlap between these data and areas previously identified in our analyses. Most notably, all newly discovered natural roosts (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         those located in 2015 through 2019) were found in high-quality forested habitats within our identified areas.
                    </P>
                    <P>Using the approaches described above, we delineated a total of five areas considered to be occupied at the time of listing (see Occupancy at the Time of Listing, above) as critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. One of these areas consists primarily of lands within APAFR, an area with well-documented occurrence and roosting, as well as areas surrounding the Kissimmee River, which are likely important for connectivity but lack general survey information. Due to the latter, we revised the boundaries of this area to conform to the boundaries of APAFR. APAFR is covered by an approved integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) that provides benefits to the Florida bonneted bat and its habitat and thus will be exempted from the proposed designation under section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (see Exemptions, below). The four remaining critical habitat units proposed for designation are described below (see Proposed Critical Habitat Designation, below).</P>
                    <P>
                        We are not proposing to designate any areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing because we did not find any unoccupied areas to be essential for the conservation of the species. We determined that a critical habitat designation limited to geographical areas occupied by the species is adequate to ensure the conservation of the species. The occupied areas identified for designation provide for the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat because they provide ecological diversity (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         representation), and duplication and distribution of populations across the range of the species (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         redundancy), allowing the species to withstand catastrophic events. Additionally, the areas are sufficiently large to allow for populations with adequate resiliency. All areas proposed as critical habitat are within the geographical area occupied by the bat at the time of listing and contain the PBFs essential to the conservation of the species.
                    </P>
                    <P>When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries, we made every effort to avoid including large areas of agriculture or developed areas such as lands devoid of native vegetation or covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures due to the general lack of PBFs for the Florida bonneted bat. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of such developed lands. Any such developed lands inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this proposed rule have been excluded by text in the proposed rule and are not proposed for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, if the critical habitat is finalized as proposed, a Federal action involving these developed lands would not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action would affect the PBFs in the adjacent critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>
                        The proposed critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of this document in the rule portion. We include more detailed information on the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available to the public on 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, on our internet sites 
                        <E T="03">http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/,</E>
                         and at the South Florida Ecological Services Office (see 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                        , above).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Critical Habitat Designation</HD>
                    <P>We are proposing to designate four units of occupied habitat as critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. All four units are occupied (at the time of listing and currently, based on the most recent data available; see description of occupancy status, above). Portions of three of these units overlap with areas that have already been designated as critical habitat for six other federally listed species (table 1).</P>
                    <P>
                        Table 1 lists the approximate area of each critical habitat unit, land ownership, and co-occurring listed species and critical habitat within each proposed critical habitat unit. Area values were computer-generated using GIS software, summed within each ownership category, and then rounded to the nearest whole number. Ownership was classified into one of six categories—Federal, Tribal (including lands held in trust by the Federal Government), State, county, local, or private/other (including nonprofit organizations)—by reviewing the most recent parcel ownership data provided by each county. Where ownership is classified as “Unidentified,” it means that ownership of that area could not be determined for one or more of the following reasons: (1) Records within parcel data missing ownership data or marked as no data, abandoned, no value, or reference only (may include roads of unidentified ownership), and (2) areas missing from parcel data for which ownership could not be determined and accurately calculated (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         some roads, rights-of-way, and surface waters).
                    </P>
                    <P>The four areas we propose as critical habitat are:</P>
                    <P>(1) Unit 1: Peace River and surrounding areas (Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, and Sarasota Counties);</P>
                    <P>(2) Unit 2: Babcock-Webb WMA, Babcock Ranch, and surrounding areas (Charlotte, Lee, and Glades Counties);</P>
                    <P>(3) Unit 3: Big Cypress and surrounding areas (Collier, Monroe, and Hendry Counties); and</P>
                    <P>
                        (4) Unit 4: Miami-Dade natural areas (Miami-Dade County).
                        <PRTPAGE P="35528"/>
                    </P>
                    <GPOTABLE COLS="4" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s75,xs72,18,r100">
                        <TTITLE>
                            Table 1—Florida Bonneted Bat Proposed Critical Habitat Units, Including Hectares (
                            <E T="01">ha</E>
                            ) and Acres (
                            <E T="01">ac</E>
                            ) by Land Ownership Type, and Co-Occurring Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Found in Each Unit
                        </TTITLE>
                        <BOXHD>
                            <CHED H="1">Unit</CHED>
                            <CHED H="1">Ownership</CHED>
                            <CHED H="1">
                                Area
                                <LI>(ha (ac))</LI>
                            </CHED>
                            <CHED H="1">
                                Co-occurring listed species or existing critical habitat (ha (ac)) for listed species 
                                <LI>(E = endangered; T = threatened)</LI>
                            </CHED>
                        </BOXHD>
                        <ROW RUL="n,n,s,n">
                            <ENT I="01">Unit 1—Peace River and surrounding areas</ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                State
                                <LI>County</LI>
                                <LI>Local</LI>
                                <LI>Private and Other</LI>
                                <LI>Unidentified</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                4,537 (11,212)
                                <LI>119 (295)</LI>
                                <LI>13 (32)</LI>
                                <LI>14,087 (34,810)</LI>
                                <LI>793 (1,960)</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>Audubon's crested caracara (T); wood stork (T); Britton's beargrass (E); Lewton's polygala (E); pygmy fringe-tree (E); Florida panther (E); eastern indigo snake (T); West Indian manatee (T, CH = 507 ha [1,254 ac]).</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW RUL="s">
                            <ENT I="03">Total</ENT>
                            <ENT/>
                            <ENT>19,550 (48,310)</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW>
                            <ENT I="01">Unit 2—Babcock-Webb WMA, Babcock Ranch, and surrounding areas</ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                Federal
                                <LI>State</LI>
                                <LI>County</LI>
                                <LI>Local</LI>
                                <LI>Private and Other Unidentified</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                1 (3)
                                <LI>61,128 (151,050)</LI>
                                <LI>3,724 (9,203)</LI>
                                <LI>8 (21)</LI>
                                <LI>32,001 (79,077)</LI>
                                <LI>642 (1,587)</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>Florida panther (E); Audubon's crested caracara (T); Florida scrub-jay (T); red-cockaded woodpecker (E); wood stork (T); beautiful pawpaw (E); eastern indigo snake (T); West Indian manatee (T).</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW RUL="s">
                            <ENT I="03">Total</ENT>
                            <ENT/>
                            <ENT>97,505 (240,941)</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW>
                            <ENT I="01">Unit 3—Big Cypress and surrounding areas</ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                Federal
                                <LI>Tribal</LI>
                                <LI>State</LI>
                                <LI>County</LI>
                                <LI>Local</LI>
                                <LI>Private and Other Unidentified</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                250,733 (619,573)
                                <LI>10,527 (26,012)</LI>
                                <LI>61,869 (152,882)</LI>
                                <LI>3,384 (8,362)</LI>
                                <LI>173 (427)</LI>
                                <LI>38,227 (94,460)</LI>
                                <LI>1,920 (4,745)</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>Audubon's crested caracara (T); Cape Sable seaside sparrow (E); red-cockaded woodpecker (E); wood stork (T); Florida panther (E); eastern indigo snake (T); West Indian manatee (T, CH = 3,868 ha [9,557 ac]).</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW RUL="s">
                            <ENT I="03">Total</ENT>
                            <ENT/>
                            <ENT>366,833 (906,462)</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW RUL="n,n,s,n">
                            <ENT I="01">Unit 4—Miami-Dade natural areas</ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                Federal
                                <LI>Tribal</LI>
                                <LI>State</LI>
                                <LI>County</LI>
                                <LI>Local</LI>
                                <LI>Private and Other</LI>
                                <LI>Unidentified</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>
                                71,385 (176,395)
                                <LI>326 (805)</LI>
                                <LI>26,159 (64,639)</LI>
                                <LI>4,210 (10,404)</LI>
                                <LI>114 (281)</LI>
                                <LI>11,496 (28,408)</LI>
                                <LI>683 (1,688)</LI>
                            </ENT>
                            <ENT>West Indian manatee (T); Florida panther (E); Cape Sable seaside sparrow (E, CH = 21,491 ha [53,104 ac]); Everglade snail kite (E, CH = 2,000 ha [4,941 ac]); wood stork (T); eastern indigo snake (T); Bartram's scrub-hairstreak (E, CH = 3,235 ha [7,994 ac]); Garber's spurge [T]; American crocodile (T, CH = 17,242 ha [42,606 ac]); Florida leafwing (E, CH = 3,235 ha [7,994 ac]); sand flax (E); Blodgett's silverbush (T); Miami tiger beetle (E); Florida bristle fern (E).</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW RUL="n,n,s,n">
                            <ENT I="03">Total</ENT>
                            <ENT/>
                            <ENT>114,372 (282,620)</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <ROW>
                            <ENT I="05">Total</ENT>
                            <ENT/>
                            <ENT>598,261 (1,478,333)</ENT>
                        </ROW>
                        <TNOTE>
                            <E T="02">Note:</E>
                             WMA = Wildlife Management Area.
                        </TNOTE>
                    </GPOTABLE>
                    <P>We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat, below.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Unit 1: Peace River and Surrounding Areas (Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, and Sarasota Counties, Florida)</HD>
                    <P>
                        Unit 1 consists of 19,550 ha (48,310 ac) of lands in Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, and Sarasota Counties, Florida. This unit is located along the Peace River and its tributaries (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         Charlie Creek), south of CR-64 with the majority generally west of US-17. Unit 1 consists of approximately 4,537 ha (11,212 ac) of State-owned land, 119 ha (295 ac) of County-owned land, 13 ha (32 ac) of locally owned land, 14,087 ha (34,810 ac) of private and other lands, and 793 ha (1,960 ac) of land of unidentified ownership (table 1). The largest landholding within this unit is the RV Griffin Reserve. Other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit (see 
                        <E T="03">Conservation Lands,</E>
                         Supporting Documents). We consider this unit as occupied at the time of listing based on documented presence of bonneted bats within the unit (see 
                        <E T="03">Occupancy at the Time of Listing</E>
                        , above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Unit 1 contains five of the seven PBFs for the bonneted bat (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         PBFs 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7). While this unit contains representative forest types that support the species by providing roosting and foraging habitat, it consists of area primarily outside of the bat's core areas (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         does not possess all features described in PBF 1). Because of its relative small size, this unit also does not possess all features described in PBF 5. However, Unit 1 encompasses a known movement corridor (generally connecting individuals between Unit 2 and APAFR) and adds ecological diversity (a natural river corridor) to the overall proposed designated areas. In addition, the Peace River and adjacent forested lands maintain high habitat suitability, providing open water and likely abundant prey.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The PBFs essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat in Unit 1 may require special management considerations or protection due to the following: Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation resulting from development and land conversion; impacts from land management practices (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         timber management and fuels reduction, prescribed fire, management of nonnative and invasive species, habitat restoration) or lack of suitable habitat management; wind energy; and pesticide use.
                        <PRTPAGE P="35529"/>
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Unit 2: Babcock-Webb WMA, Babcock Ranch, and Surrounding Areas (Charlotte, Lee, and Glades Counties, Florida)</HD>
                    <P>
                        Unit 2 consists of 97,505 ha (240,941 ac) of lands in Charlotte, Lee, and Glades Counties, Florida. The majority of Unit 2 is located in Charlotte County, east of I-75; other portions are in northern Lee and western Glades Counties. This unit consists of approximately 1 ha (3 ac) of Federal land, 61,128 ha (151,050 ac) of State-owned land, 3,724 ha (9,203 ac) of County-owned land, 8 ha (21 ac) of locally owned land, 32,001 ha (79,077 ac) of private and other lands, and 642 ha (1,587 ac) of land of unidentified ownership (table 1). The largest land holdings within this unit are Babcock-Webb WMA and Babcock Ranch Preserve; other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit (see 
                        <E T="03">Conservation Lands,</E>
                         Supporting Documents).
                    </P>
                    <P>Unit 2 represents the westernmost portion of the species' core areas. This unit was occupied at the time of listing, is currently occupied, and contains all of the PBFs for the bonneted bat. Babcock-Webb WMA and surrounding areas support the largest abundance known (approximately 79 bonneted bats), and the bulk of all known roost sites (Myers, pers. comm. 2015; Gore, pers. comm. 2016; Ober, pers. comm. 2014; Braun de Torrez, pers. comm. 2016).</P>
                    <P>
                        The PBFs essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat in Unit 2 may require special management considerations or protection due to the following: Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation resulting from development (including oil and gas exploration) and land conversion; impacts from land management practices (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         timber management and fuels reduction, prescribed fire, management of nonnative and invasive species, habitat restoration) or lack of suitable habitat management; impacts from coastal squeeze; and pesticide use.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Unit 3: Big Cypress and Surrounding Areas (Collier, Monroe, and Hendry Counties, Florida)</HD>
                    <P>
                        Unit 3 consists of 366,833 ha (906,462 ac) of lands in Collier, Monroe, and Hendry Counties, Florida. The majority of Unit 3 is located in Collier County, south of I-75; the remainder occurs in southern Hendry County and mainland portions of Monroe County. This unit consists of approximately 250,733 ha (619,573 ac) of Federal land, 10,527 ha (26,012 ac) of Tribal land, 61,869 ha (152,882 ac) of State-owned land, 3,384 ha (8,362 ac) of County-owned land, 173 ha (427 ac) of locally owned land, 38,227 ha (94,460 ac) of private and other lands, and 1,920 ha (4,745 ac) of land of unidentified ownership (table 1). The largest land holdings within Unit 3 are BCNP, PSSF, FSPSP, ENP, and FPNWR. Other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit (see 
                        <E T="03">Conservation Lands,</E>
                         Supporting Documents). This unit was occupied at the time of listing, is currently occupied, and contains all of the PBFs for the bonneted bat.
                    </P>
                    <P>Unit 3 represents the southwestern portion of the species' core areas. The species has been documented to use many locations throughout the unit (specifically, within BCNP, PSSF, FSPSP, and FPNWR) (see table 1 of the final listing rule (78 FR 61004, October 2, 2013)). The discoveries of three natural roosts in 2015 and 2016 further demonstrate the relevance and importance of Unit 3.</P>
                    <P>
                        The PBFs essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat in Unit 3 may require special management considerations or protection due to the following: Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation resulting from development (including oil and gas exploration) and land conversion; impacts from land management practices (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         timber management and fuels reduction, prescribed fire, management of nonnative and invasive species, habitat restoration) or lack of suitable habitat management; impacts from climate change and coastal squeeze; and pesticide use.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Approximately 10,527 ha (26,012 ac) of Tribal lands occur within Unit 3, including lands within the Seminole Big Cypress Reservation and the Miccosukee Sherrod Ranch. All or some of these lands may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see 
                        <E T="03">Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts</E>
                         under the Exclusions section of this rule).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Unit 4: Miami-Dade Natural Areas (Miami-Dade County, Florida)</HD>
                    <P>
                        Unit 4 consists of 114,372 ha (282,620 ac) of lands in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Unit 4 consists mostly of conservation lands west of the Florida Turnpike. This unit consists of approximately 71,385 ha (176,395 ac) of Federal land, 326 ha (805 ac) of Tribal land, 26,159 ha (64,639 ac) of State-owned land, 4,210 ha (10,404 ac) of County-owned land, 114 ha (281 ac) of locally owned land, 11,496 ha (28,408 ac) of private and other lands, and 683 ha (1,688 ac) of land of unidentified ownership (table 1). The largest land holding within this unit is ENP; other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit (see 
                        <E T="03">Conservation Lands,</E>
                         Supporting Documents). This unit was occupied at the time of listing, is currently occupied, and contains all of the PBFs for the bonneted bat.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Unit 4 represents the eastern portion of the species' core areas and includes the bulk of the remaining high-quality natural habitat in the species' former strongholds on the east coast (Belwood 1992, pp. 216-217, 219; Timm and Genoways 2004, p. 857; Timm and Arroyo-Cabrales 2008, p. 1; Solari 2016, pp. 1-2; see 
                        <E T="03">Historical Distribution,</E>
                         proposed listing rule (77 FR 60750, October 4, 2012)). This area may be the last remaining predominantly natural occupied habitat on the east coast of Florida.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        The PBFs essential to the conservation of the Florida bonneted bat in Unit 4 may require special management considerations or protection due to the following: Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation resulting from development and land conversion; impacts from land management practices (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         timber management and fuels reduction, prescribed fire, management of nonnative and invasive species, habitat restoration) or lack of suitable habitat management; impacts from climate change and coastal squeeze; and pesticide use.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        Approximately 326 ha (805 ac) of Tribal lands occur within Unit 4, including lands that are part of the Miccosukee Resort and Gaming Center. All or some of these lands may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see 
                        <E T="03">Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts</E>
                         under the Exclusions section of this rule).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Effects of Critical Habitat Designation</HD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Section 7 Consultation</HD>
                    <P>
                        Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat.
                        <PRTPAGE P="35530"/>
                    </P>
                    <P>We published a final regulation with a revised definition of destruction or adverse modification on August 27, 2019 (84 FR 44976). Destruction or adverse modification means a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat as a whole for the conservation of a listed species.</P>
                    <P>
                        If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into consultation with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the section 7 consultation process are actions on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that require a Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        ) or a permit from the Service under section 10 of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat, and actions on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally funded or authorized, do not require section 7 consultation.
                    </P>
                    <P>Compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) is documented through our issuance of:</P>
                    <P>(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat; or</P>
                    <P>(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect and are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. We define “reasonable and prudent alternatives” (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions identified during consultation that:</P>
                    <P>(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of the action,</P>
                    <P>(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,</P>
                    <P>(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and</P>
                    <P>(4) Would, in the Service Director's opinion, avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or avoid the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are similarly variable.</P>
                    <P>Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth requirements for Federal agencies to reinitiate formal consultation on previously reviewed actions. Consultation should generally be reinitiated where the Federal agency has retained discretionary involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law) and, subsequent to the previous consultation, we have listed a new species or designated critical habitat that may be affected by the Federal action, the action has been modified in a manner that affects the species or critical habitat in a way not considered in the previous consultation, the amount of take has exceeded what was included in the incidental take statement, or new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or their critical habitat in ways that were not considered. In such situations, Federal agencies may need to request reinitiation of consultation with us; however, the regulations provide an exception to the requirement to reinitiate consultation where a new species has been listed or critical habitat designated for certain land management plans. Please refer to the regulations for a description of that exception.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Application of the “Adverse Modification” Standard</HD>
                    <P>The key factor related to the destruction or adverse modification determination is whether implementation of the proposed Federal action directly or indirectly alters the designated critical habitat in a way that appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat as a whole for the conservation of the listed species. As discussed above, the role of critical habitat is to support PBFs essential to the conservation of a listed species and other specific areas that are essential to provide for the conservation of the species.</P>
                    <P>Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may violate 7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying or adversely modifying such habitat, or that may be affected by such designation.</P>
                    <P>Activities that the Services may, during a consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, find are likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat include, but are not limited to:</P>
                    <P>
                        (1) Actions that would significantly alter roosting, foraging, or dispersal habitat. Such activities may include, but are not limited to: Residential, commercial, or recreational development including associated infrastructure; clearcutting, deforestation or habitat conversion for large-scale or intensive agriculture, mining (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         oil/gas exploration), industry (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         wind energy), or other development; water diversion, drainage, or wetland loss or conversion. These activities could destroy Florida bonneted bat roosting and foraging sites (necessary for shelter and reproduction); reduce habitat conditions below what is necessary for survival and growth; and/or eliminate or reduce the habitat necessary for successful reproduction, growth, dispersal, and expansion (see 
                        <E T="03">Physical or Biological Features,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (2) Actions that would significantly alter vegetation structure or composition. Such activities could include, but are not limited to: Removal of forest or other areas with large or mature trees and other natural areas with suitable structures (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         tall or mature live or dead trees, tree snags, and trees with cavities, hollows, or crevices); suppression of natural fires; prescribed fire conducted in a manner that does not insure protection of large trees and/or snags; timber management or fuel reduction (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         thinning); control of invasive nonnative vegetation; habitat conversions or restorations; creation or maintenance of trails or firebreaks; or clearing native vegetation for construction of residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, or recreational development and associated infrastructure. These activities could destroy Florida bonneted bat roosting sites; reduce foraging habitat and prey base; reduce habitat conditions below what is necessary for survival and growth; and/or eliminate or reduce the habitat necessary for successful reproduction, growth, dispersal, and expansion (see 
                        <E T="03">Physical or Biological Features,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (3) Actions that would significantly reduce suitability of habitat, alter behavior or movement of the Florida bonneted bat, or impact prey base (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         availability, abundance, density, diversity). In addition to altering habitat, vegetation, or structure (given above), this includes, but is not limited to: Widespread application of pesticides; exposure to contaminants (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         direct or through drinking water or 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35531"/>
                        food chain); excessive alteration of natural lighting (that disrupts movements or foraging conditions or impacts prey); introduction of biocontrol agents; creation and operation of wind energy facilities; non-natural changes in hydrology; or other disturbances (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         excessive noise, excessive temperature) that impact prey or alter behavior, movement, or ability to echolocate. These activities could alter conditions beyond the species' tolerance, adversely affect individuals and their life cycles, reduce habitat suitability, or impact prey base, thereby affecting conditions necessary for survival, reproduction, growth, dispersal, and expansion (see 
                        <E T="03">Physical or Biological Features,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        (4) Actions that would result in an increased competition for suitable roost sites or increased risk of predation. Possible actions could include, but are not limited to: Removal of suitable roosting structures (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         mature trees or snags); management actions that discourage the retention of suitable roosting structures either now or in the future; lack of management with regard to the release of nonnative or introduced species (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         nonnative snakes). These activities can increase competition for tree cavities or other limited roosting habitat, introduce disease or pathogens, or increase predation, thereby affecting conditions for survival, growth, and reproduction (see 
                        <E T="03">Physical or Biological Features,</E>
                         above).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Exemptions</HD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act</HD>
                    <P>The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) required each military installation that includes land and water suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to complete an INRMP by November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources found on the base. Each INRMP includes:</P>
                    <P>(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation, including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;</P>
                    <P>(2) A statement of goals and priorities;</P>
                    <P>(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented to provide for these ecological needs; and</P>
                    <P>(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.</P>
                    <P>Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.</P>
                    <P>The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that: “The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographic areas owned or controlled by the Department of Defense (DoD), or designated for its use, that are subject to an INRMP prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.”</P>
                    <P>We consult with the military on the development and implementation of INRMPs for installations with listed species. We analyzed INRMPs developed by military installations located within the range of the proposed critical habitat designation for the Florida bonneted bat to determine if they meet the criteria for exemption from critical habitat under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. The following area owned by DoD is covered by an INRMP within the proposed critical habitat designation.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD3">Avon Park Air Force Range (APAFR)</HD>
                    <P>The APAFR, located in Polk County, has a current and completed INRMP, signed by FWC and the Service in September 2017. The INRMP provides conservation measures for the species and management of important upland and wetland habitats on the base (U.S. Air Force 2017, pp. 9-10, 55-56, 74, 77, 90-91, 95, 97).</P>
                    <P>
                        APAFR's INRMP benefits the Florida bonneted bat through ongoing ecosystem management, and specifically active management of RCW habitat, which should provide habitat for the species (U.S. Air Force 2017, pp. 9-10, 55). Some major goals identified in the plan that should benefit the bonneted bat include: (1) Maintaining and restoring ecosystem composition, structure, and function with a special emphasis on rare and endemic communities (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         pine flatwoods); (2) using ecological processes such as fire as the primary tool for restoring ecosystems; (3) managing or restoring hydrological function of floodplains, groundwater, lakes, riparian areas, springs, swamps, streams, and wetlands to protect and ensure their quality and ecological functions; (4) conserving, protecting, and recovering endangered and threatened species; and (5) identifying the presence of exotic and invasive species and implementing programs to control or eradicate those species from the installation (U.S. Air Force 2017, pp. 9-10).
                    </P>
                    <P>In addition, AFAPR's INRMP includes the following specific projects to benefit the bonneted bat: (1) Annual acoustic surveys to determine presence of Florida bonneted bats, implemented on a 3-year rotation (covering one-third of the approximately 24,281 ha (60,000 ac) of available suitable habitat annually); (2) as-needed intensive acoustic and roost search surveys in areas identified during annual acoustic monitoring; (3) daily acoustic monitoring of all known roosts to provide long-term presence/absence and roosting activity measures; (4) retention of snags within known bonneted bat roosting habitat (except within firebreaks); and (5) invasive plant treatments, supplemented through the FWC Upland Invasive Species contracts and FWC Herbicide Bank (U.S. Air Force 2017, pp. 91, 95, and 97). The APAFR's INRMP also includes a commitment to investigate the feasibility of monitoring bonneted bat movement patterns using radio telemetry (U.S. Air Force 2017, p. 91). As part of this effort, the Air Force has worked with UF and FWC to capture and radio track bats to find a total of five natural roosts as of July 2019 (R. Aldredge, pers. comm. 2019c). The bonneted bat will also benefit from APAFR's INRMP measures guiding fire management, including wildfire suppression and adaptive/proactive prescribed fire to meet species-specific conservation measures and habitat goals (U.S. Air Force 2017, pp. 90, 95).</P>
                    <P>Based on the above considerations, and in accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands are subject to the APAFR's INRMP and that conservation efforts identified in the INRMP will provide benefits to the Florida bonneted bat and the features essential to the species occurring on the base. Therefore, lands within APAFR are exempt from critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not including approximately 43,740 ha (108,082 ac) of habitat in this proposed critical habitat designation because of this exemption.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Exclusions</HD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act</HD>
                    <P>
                        Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the best available scientific data after 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35532"/>
                        taking into consideration the economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making that determination, the statute on its face, as well as the legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give to any factor.
                    </P>
                    <P>When identifying the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive due to the protection from destruction of adverse modification as a result of actions with a Federal nexus; the educational benefits of mapping essential habitat for recovery of the listed species; and any benefits that may result from a designation due to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat.</P>
                    <P>When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of partnerships; or implementation of a management plan. In the case of the Florida bonneted bat, the benefits of critical habitat include public awareness of the presence of the bat and the importance of habitat protection, and, where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for the bat due to protection from adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat. Additionally, continued implementation of an ongoing management plan that provides equal to or more conservation than a critical habitat designation would reduce the benefits of including that specific area in the critical habitat designation. In practice, situations with a Federal nexus exist primarily on Federal lands or for projects funded by, undertaken by, or authorized by Federal agencies.</P>
                    <P>We evaluate the existence of a conservation plan when considering the benefits of inclusion. We consider a variety of factors, including but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized; how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical or biological features; whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation management strategies and actions contained in a management plan will be implemented into the future; whether the conservation strategies in the plan are likely to be effective; and whether the plan contains a monitoring program or adaptive management to ensure that the conservation measures are effective and can be adapted in the future in response to new information.</P>
                    <P>After identifying the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to evaluate whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If our analysis indicates that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion, we then determine whether exclusion would result in extinction of the species. If exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result in extinction, we will not exclude it from the designation.</P>
                    <P>We are considering whether to exclude the following areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from the final critical habitat designation for the Florida bonneted bat: (1) In Unit 3, approximately 10,527 ha (26,012 ac) of Tribal lands, including lands within the Seminole Big Cypress Reservation and the Miccosukee Sherrod Ranch; and (2) in Unit 4, approximately 326 ha (805 ac) of Tribal lands, including lands that are part of the Miccosukee Resort and Gaming Center.</P>
                    <P>However, we specifically solicit comments on the inclusion or exclusion of such areas or any other areas that may justify exclusion. In the paragraphs below, we provide a description of our consideration of these lands for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The final decision on whether to exclude any areas will be based on the best scientific data available at the time of the final designation, including information obtained during the comment period and information about the economic impact of designation.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts</HD>
                    <P>Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to consider economic impacts, we prepared an analysis of the probable economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related factors.</P>
                    <P>Potential land use sectors that may be affected by the proposed critical habitat designation include agriculture; conservation/restoration; residential, commercial, industrial or recreational development and associated infrastructure; dredging; fire management; forest management including silviculture/timber; grazing; recreation; transportation; Tribal lands; utilities; energy supply, distribution, and use; and water diversion, drainage, or wetland loss or conversion. There is a Federal nexus associated with each of these economic activities when they occur on Federal lands. However, some activities on State, County, private, or other lands may not have a Federal nexus and, therefore, may not be subject to section 7 consultations. These may include agriculture (including use of pesticides); development and utilities (including alteration of natural lighting); fire and forest management; grazing; recreation; and loss, diversion, or conversion of wetlands not regulated by the Clean Water Act. Exceptions may include: (1) Lands slated for large-scale private development, which may require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits from the Environmental Protection Agency or section 404 permits from the Army Corps of Engineers; (2) road-related improvements that involve U.S. Department of Transportation funding; or (3) other land-disturbing actions that require section 404 permits.</P>
                    <P>
                        To assess the probable economic impacts of a designation, we must first evaluate specific land uses or activities and projects that may occur in the area of the critical habitat. We then must evaluate the impacts that a specific critical habitat designation may have on restricting or modifying specific land uses or activities for the benefit of the species and its habitat within the areas proposed. We then identify which conservation efforts may be the result of the species being listed under the Act versus those attributed solely to the designation of critical habitat for this particular species. The probable economic impact of a proposed critical habitat designation is analyzed by comparing scenarios both “with critical habitat” and “without critical habitat.” The “without critical habitat” scenario represents the baseline for the analysis, which includes the existing regulatory and socio-economic burden imposed on landowners, managers, or other resource users potentially affected by the designation of critical habitat (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         under the Federal listing as well as other Federal, State, and local regulations). The baseline, therefore, represents the costs of all efforts attributable to the listing of the species under the Act (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         conservation of the species and its habitat incurred regardless of whether critical habitat is designated). The “with critical habitat” scenario describes the incremental impacts associated specifically with the designation of critical habitat for the species. The incremental conservation efforts and associated impacts would not be expected without the designation 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35533"/>
                        of critical habitat for the species. In other words, the incremental costs are those attributable solely to the designation of critical habitat, above and beyond the baseline costs. These are the costs we use when evaluating the benefits of inclusion and exclusion of particular areas from the final designation of critical habitat should we choose to conduct a discretionary 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis.
                    </P>
                    <P>
                        For this designation, we developed an incremental effects memorandum (IEM; Service 2020) considering the probable incremental economic impacts that may result from this proposed designation of critical habitat. The information contained in our IEM was then used to develop a screening analysis of the probable effects of the designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat (Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc) 2020). We began by conducting a screening analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat in order to focus our analysis on the key factors that are likely to result in incremental economic impacts. The purpose of the screening analysis is to filter out the geographic areas in which the critical habitat designation is unlikely to result in probable incremental economic impacts. In particular, the screening analysis considers baseline costs (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         absent critical habitat designation) and includes probable economic impacts where land and water use may be subject to conservation plans, land management plans, best management practices, or regulations that protect the habitat area as a result of the Federal listing status of the species. The screening analysis filters out particular areas of critical habitat that are already subject to such protections and are, therefore, unlikely to incur incremental economic impacts. Ultimately, the screening analysis allows us to focus our analysis on evaluating the specific areas or sectors that may incur probable incremental economic impacts as a result of the designation. The screening analysis also assesses whether units are unoccupied by the species and may require additional management or conservation efforts as a result of the critical habitat designation for the species which may incur incremental economic impacts. This screening analysis combined with the information contained in our IEM are what we consider our DEA of the proposed critical habitat designation for the Florida bonneted bat and is summarized in the narrative below.
                    </P>
                    <P>Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives in quantitative (to the extent feasible) and qualitative terms. Consistent with the E.O. regulatory analysis requirements, our effects analysis under the Act may take into consideration impacts to both directly and indirectly impacted entities, where practicable and reasonable. If sufficient data are available, we assess to the extent practicable the probable impacts to both directly and indirectly impacted entities. As part of our screening analysis, we considered the types of economic activities that are likely to occur within the areas likely affected by the critical habitat designation. Our IEM identified probable incremental economic impacts that may result from the proposed designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat associated with the following categories of activities: Development; oil and gas exploration; wind energy; land management; prescribed fire; timber management and fuels reduction; grazing; wildlife, game, or listed species management; habitat restoration; control of nonnative species; pesticide application; and recreational activities. We considered each industry or category individually. Additionally, we considered whether their activities have any Federal involvement. Critical habitat designation will not affect activities that do not have any Federal involvement; designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by Federal agencies. In areas where the Florida bonneted bat is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult with the Service under section 7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or implement that may affect the species. If we finalize this proposed critical habitat designation, consultations to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat would be incorporated into the existing consultation process.</P>
                    <P>
                        In our IEM, we attempted to clarify the distinction between the effects that result from the species being listed and those attributable to the critical habitat designation (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         difference between the jeopardy and adverse modification standards) for the Florida bonneted bat's critical habitat. The following specific circumstances in this case help to inform our evaluation: (1) The essential PBFs identified for critical habitat are the same features essential for the life requisites of the species, and (2) any actions that would result in sufficient harm or harassment to constitute jeopardy to the Florida bonneted bat would also likely adversely affect the essential PBFs of critical habitat. The IEM outlines our rationale concerning this limited distinction between baseline conservation efforts and incremental impacts of the designation of critical habitat for this species. This evaluation of the incremental effects has been used as the basis to evaluate the probable incremental economic impacts of this proposed designation of critical habitat.
                    </P>
                    <P>Because all areas are occupied, the economic impacts of implementing the rule through section 7 of the Act will most likely be limited to additional administrative effort to consider adverse modification. This finding is based on the following factors:</P>
                    <P>• Any activities with a Federal nexus occurring within occupied habitat will be subject to section 7 consultation requirements regardless of critical habitat designation, due to the presence of the listed species; and</P>
                    <P>• In most cases, project modifications requested to avoid adverse modification are likely to be the same as those needed to avoid jeopardy in occupied habitat.</P>
                    <P>Our analysis considers the potential need to consult on development, transportation, land management, habitat restoration, and other activities authorized, undertaken, or funded by Federal agencies within critical habitat. The total incremental section 7 costs associated with the designation of the proposed units are estimated to be less than $239,000 per year (IEc 2020, pp. 2, 9). While the proposed critical habitat area is relatively large, totaling 598,261 ha (1,478,333 ac), the strong baseline protections that are already anticipated to exist for this species due to its listed status, the existence of a consultation area map that alerts managing agencies about the location of the species and its habitat, and the presence of other listed species in the area keep the costs comparatively low. The highest costs are expected in Unit 3, associated with anticipated future consultations within BCNP and ENP. However, based on recent changes to Service regulations, it is possible that some of these consultations, which may include reinitiations of land use plans, may not be required.</P>
                    <P>
                        The designation of critical habitat may trigger additional regulatory changes. For example, the designation may cause other Federal, State, or local permitting or regulatory agencies to expand or change standards or requirements. Regulatory uncertainty generated by critical habitat may also have impacts. For example, landowners or buyers may perceive that the rule will restrict land or water use activities in some way and therefore value the use of the land less than they would have 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35534"/>
                        absent critical habitat. This is a perception, or stigma, effect of critical habitat on markets. While the screening analysis was unable to quantify the degree to which the public's perception of possible restrictions on the use of private land designated as critical habitat could affect private property values, IEc (2020, p. 10) recognized that a number of factors may already result in perception-related effects on these private lands, including awareness of the species due to a previously existing consultation area map, and the presence of a large number of co-occurring listed species and existing critical habitat in these areas.
                    </P>
                    <P>At this time, we are not considering any specific areas for exclusion from the final designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act based on economic impacts. As we stated earlier, we are soliciting data and comments from the public on the DEA, as well as all aspects of the proposed rule and our amended required determinations. During the development of a final designation, we will consider any information currently available or received during the public comment period regarding the economic impacts of the proposed designation and will determine whether any specific areas should be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Impacts on National Security and Homeland Security</HD>
                    <P>
                        Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act may not apply to all DoD lands or areas that pose potential national-security concerns (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         a DoD installation that is in the process of revising its INRMP for a newly listed species or a species previously not covered). Nevertheless, when designating critical habitat under section 4(b)(2), the Service must consider impacts on national security, including homeland security, on lands or areas not covered by section 4(a)(3)(B)(i). Accordingly, we will always consider for exclusion from the designation areas for which DoD, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or another Federal agency has requested exclusion based on an assertion of national-security or homeland-security concerns.
                    </P>
                    <P>We cannot, however, automatically exclude requested areas. When DoD, DHS, or another Federal agency requests exclusion from critical habitat on the basis of national-security or homeland-security impacts, it must provide a reasonably specific justification of an incremental impact on national security that would result from the designation of that specific area as critical habitat. That justification could include demonstration of probable impacts, such as impacts to ongoing border-security patrols and surveillance activities, or a delay in training or facility construction, as a result of compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the Act. If the agency requesting the exclusion does not provide us with a reasonably specific justification, we will contact the agency to recommend that it provide a specific justification or clarification of its concerns relative to the probable incremental impact that could result from the designation. If the agency provides a reasonably specific justification, we will defer to the expert judgment of DoD, DHS, or another Federal agency as to: (1) Whether activities on its lands or waters, or its activities on other lands or waters, have national-security or homeland-security implications; (2) the importance of those implications; and (3) the degree to which the cited implications would be adversely affected in the absence of an exclusion. In that circumstance, in conducting a discretionary 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, we will give great weight to national-security and homeland-security concerns in analyzing the benefits of exclusion.</P>
                    <P>
                        Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are lands where a national security impact might exist. In preparing this proposal, we have determined that some lands within the proposed designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat are owned or managed by the DoD. We already discussed one area (APAFR) with an approved INRMP under 
                        <E T="03">Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act,</E>
                         above. There are other DoD lands (owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) within the proposed critical habitat designation area. However, to date, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has not expressed concern that the designation of these lands would have implications for national security. During the development of a final designation, we will consider any information currently available or received during the public comment period regarding the national security impacts of the proposed designation and will determine whether any specific areas should be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts</HD>
                    <P>Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national security. We consider a number of factors including whether there are permitted conservation plans covering the species in the area such as HCPs, safe harbor agreements, or candidate conservation agreements with assurances, or whether there are non-permitted conservation agreements and partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In addition, we look at the existence of Tribal conservation plans and partnerships and consider the government-to-government relationship of the United States with Tribal entities. We also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the designation. We evaluate each potential exclusion on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the benefits of exclusion may outweigh the benefits of inclusion, with the understanding that we must designate such areas if the failure to do so would result in the extinction of the Florida bonneted bat.</P>
                    <P>The FWC's Species Action Plan (2013) describes actions necessary to improve the conservation status of the Florida bonneted bat, and a summary of the plan will be included in the Imperiled Species Management Plan, in satisfaction of management plan requirements in chapter 68A-27, Florida Administrative Code, Rules Relating to Endangered or Threatened Species (FWC 2013, p. iii). The management planning process relies heavily on stakeholder input and partner support (FWC 2013, p. iii). The plan is voluntary and non-binding, and dependent upon the FWC and other agencies, organizations, and other partners (FWC 2013, entire). Most of the actions involve monitoring and research, and are not location or habitat-specific (FWC 2013, pp. 24-26). Therefore, we are not proposing to exclude any units based on this plan.</P>
                    <P>
                        We seek information regarding any and all types of conservation programs and plans relevant to the protection of proposed critical habitat units for the Florida bonneted bat and which may meet the criteria for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Such programs and plans may include conservation easements, management agreements, tax incentive programs, or any other plan or program, particularly those programs that include management actions that benefit the species. When we evaluate a conservation or management plan during our consideration of the benefits of exclusion, depending on the type of conservation program, we assess a variety of factors, including, but not limited to: Whether the plan is finalized 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35535"/>
                        and was subject to compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        ); the degree to which the plan or program provides for the conservation of the essential physical or biological features; whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation management strategies and actions contained in the plan will be implemented into the future; and whether the plan contains a monitoring program or adaptive management to ensure that the conservation measures are effective and can be adapted in the future in response to new information. We will evaluate conservation and management plans for any area identified based on information received during the public comment period, to determine whether the benefits of exclusion may outweigh the benefits of inclusion. Please see Information Requested, above, for instructions on how to submit comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>There are several Executive Orders, Secretarial Orders, and policies that relate to working with Tribes. These guidance documents generally confirm our trust responsibilities to Tribes, recognize that Tribes have sovereign authority to control Tribal lands, emphasize the importance of developing partnerships with Tribal governments, and direct the Service to consult with Tribes on a government-to-government basis.</P>
                    <P>In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994 (Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with Tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that Tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available to Tribes. When we undertake a discretionary exclusion analysis, we will always consider exclusions of Tribal lands under section 4(b)(2) of the Act prior to finalizing a designation of critical habitat, and will give great weight to Tribal concerns in analyzing the benefits of exclusion.</P>
                    <P>Tribal lands in Florida are included in this proposed designation of critical habitat. Using the criteria found in Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat, above, we have determined that there are lands belonging to both the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida that were occupied by the Florida bonneted bat at the time of listing that contain the features essential for the conservation of the species. We will seek government-to-government consultation with these Tribes throughout the public comment period and during development of the final designation of Florida bonneted bat critical habitat. We will consider these areas for exclusion from the final critical habitat designation to the extent consistent with the requirements of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. On September 20, 2013, in an effort to ensure early coordination, we notified Tribal partners of our intention to make a proposed critical habitat designation and requested information. More recently, we have again informed both Tribes of how we are evaluating section 4(b)(2) of the Act and of our interest in consulting with them on a government-to-government basis.</P>
                    <P>
                        Some areas within the proposed designation are included in lands managed by the Seminole Tribe of Florida and Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida (see Units 3 and 4 descriptions; see also Government-to-Government Relations with Tribes, below), constituting a total of 10,852 ha (26,817 ac) of Tribal land being proposed as critical habitat. In this proposed rule, we are seeking input from the public as to whether or not the Secretary should exclude these or other areas under management that benefit the Florida bonneted bat from the final critical habitat designation. For example, the Seminole Tribe has conservation measures in place that support the Florida bonneted bat and its habitat (
                        <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                         limit impacts to potential roost trees during prescribed burns and home site/access road construction, maintain bonneted bat habitat through prescribed burning and construction of bat houses) (Seminole Tribe of Florida 2012, pp. 106-109). A total of 10,852 ha (26,817 ac) of Tribal land could potentially be excluded. Please see Information Requested, above, for instructions on how to submit comments.
                    </P>
                    <P>At this time, other than Tribal lands, we are not considering any specific areas for exclusion from the final designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act based on partnerships, management, or protection afforded by cooperative management efforts. We have also determined that there are no HCPs applicable to areas proposed for designation. During the development of a final designation, we will consider any information currently available or received during the public comment period regarding other relevant impacts of the proposed designation and will determine whether any specific areas should be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Peer Review</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with our July 1, 1994, peer review policy (59 FR 34270; July 1, 1994), the Service's August 22, 2016, Director's Memo on the Peer Review Process, and the Office of Management and Budget's December 16, 2004, Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (revised June 2012), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound data and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment during this public comment period.</P>
                    <P>We will consider all comments and information received during this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this proposal.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Public Hearing</HD>
                    <P>
                        Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         (see 
                        <E T="02">DATES</E>
                        , above). Such requests must be sent to the address shown in 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                        . We will schedule a public hearing on this proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         and local newspapers at least 15 days before the hearing. For the immediate future, we will provide these public hearings using webinars that will be announced on the Service's website, in addition to the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                        . The use of these virtual public hearings is consistent with our regulation at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
                        <PRTPAGE P="35536"/>
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Required Determinations</HD>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)</HD>
                    <P>Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has waived their review regarding their significance determination of this proposed rule.</P>
                    <P>Executive Order 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.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Executive Order 13771</HD>
                    <P>We do not believe this proposed rule is an E.O. 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”) (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because we believe this rule is not significant under E.O. 12866; however, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has waived their review regarding their E.O. 12866 significance determination of this proposed rule.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">
                        Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        )
                    </HD>
                    <P>
                        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        ), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effects of the rule on small entities (
                        <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                         small businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
                    </P>
                    <P>According to the Small Business Administration, small entities include small organizations such as independent nonprofit organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000 residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees, retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5 million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than $11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this designation as well as types of project modifications that may result. In general, the term “significant economic impact” is meant to apply to a typical small business firm's business operations.</P>
                    <P>Under the RFA, as amended, and as understood in the light of recent court decisions, Federal agencies are required to evaluate the potential incremental impacts of rulemaking only on those entities directly regulated by the rulemaking itself and, therefore, are not required to evaluate the potential impacts to indirectly regulated entities. The regulatory mechanism through which critical habitat protections are realized is section 7 of the Act, which requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Service, to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the Agency is not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Therefore, under section 7, only Federal action agencies are directly subject to the specific regulatory requirement (avoiding destruction and adverse modification) imposed by critical habitat designation. Consequently, it is our position that only Federal action agencies would be directly regulated if we adopt the proposed critical habitat designation. There is no requirement under the RFA to evaluate the potential impacts to entities not directly regulated. Moreover, Federal agencies are not small entities. Therefore, because no small entities would be directly regulated by this rulemaking, the Service certifies that, if made final as proposed, the proposed critical habitat designation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.</P>
                    <P>In summary, we have considered whether the proposed designation would result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. For the above reasons and based on currently available information, we certify that, if made final, the proposed critical habitat designation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Executive Order 13771</HD>
                    <P>This proposed rule is not an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”) (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because this rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use—Executive Order 13211</HD>
                    <P>Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. In our economic analysis, we did not find that this proposed critical habitat designation would significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. As most of the area included in the proposed critical habitat designation occurs on conservation lands (approximately 82 percent), the likelihood of energy development within critical habitat is low. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">
                        Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        )
                    </HD>
                    <P>In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, we make the following findings:</P>
                    <P>
                        (1) This rule would not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal governments, or the private sector, and includes both “Federal intergovernmental mandates” and “Federal private sector mandates.” These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). “Federal intergovernmental mandate” includes a regulation that “would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35537"/>
                        governments” with two exceptions. It excludes “a condition of Federal assistance.” It also excludes “a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program,” unless the regulation “relates to a then-existing Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State, local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority,” if the provision would “increase the stringency of conditions of assistance” or “place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government's responsibility to provide funding,” and the State, local, or Tribal governments “lack authority” to adjust accordingly. At the time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. “Federal private sector mandate” includes a regulation that “would impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program.”
                    </P>
                    <P>The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above onto State governments.</P>
                    <P>(2) We do not believe that this rule would significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year, that is, it is not a “significant regulatory action” under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The economic analysis concludes that incremental impacts may primarily occur due to administrative costs of section 7 consultations for land management or habitat restoration and transportation projects; however, these are not expected to significantly affect small governments. Incremental impacts stemming from various species conservation and development control activities are expected to be borne by the Federal Government, State of Florida, and Miami-Dade County, which are not considered small governments. Consequently, we do not believe that the critical habitat designation would significantly or uniquely affect small government entities. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Takings—Executive Order 12630</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with E.O. 12630 (Government Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of designating critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat in a takings implications assessment. The Act does not authorize the Service to regulate private actions on private lands or confiscate private property as a result of critical habitat designation. Designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership, or establish any closures, or restrictions on use of or access to the designated areas. Furthermore, the designation of critical habitat does not affect landowner actions that do not require Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude development of habitat conservation programs or issuance of incidental take permits to permit actions that do require Federal funding or permits to go forward. However, Federal agencies are prohibited from carrying out, funding, or authorizing actions that would destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. A takings implications assessment has been completed and concludes that this designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat does not pose significant takings implications for lands within or affected by the designation.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Federalism—Executive Order 13132</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A federalism summary impact statement is not required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce policy, we request information from, and coordinated development of this proposed critical habitat designation with, appropriate State resource agencies in Florida. From a federalism perspective, the designation of critical habitat directly affects only the responsibilities of Federal agencies. The Act imposes no other duties with respect to critical habitat, either for States and local governments, or for anyone else. As a result, the rule does not have substantial direct effects either on the States, or on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of powers and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The designation may have some benefit to these governments because the areas that contain the features essential to the conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the physical and biological features of the habitat necessary to the conservation of the species are specifically identified. This information does not alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However, it may assist these local governments in long-range planning (because these local governments no longer have to wait for case-by-case section 7 consultations to occur).</P>
                    <P>Where State and local governments require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat, consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 12988</HD>
                    <P>In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the 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. We have proposed designating critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. To assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of the species, the rule identifies the elements of PBFs essential to the conservation of the species. The designated areas of critical habitat are presented on maps, and the rule provides several options for the interested public to obtain more detailed location information, if desired.</P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">
                        Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        )
                    </HD>
                    <P>
                        This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and a submission to the Office of 
                        <PRTPAGE P="35538"/>
                        Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        ) is not required. We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">
                        National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 
                        <E T="03">et seq.</E>
                        )
                    </HD>
                    <P>
                        It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare environmental analyses pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act in connection with designating critical habitat under the Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the 
                        <E T="04">Federal Register</E>
                         on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (
                        <E T="03">Douglas County</E>
                         v. 
                        <E T="03">Babbitt,</E>
                         48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).]
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes</HD>
                    <P>
                        In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994 (Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available to tribes. Some areas within the proposed designation are included in lands managed by the Seminole Tribe of Florida and Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida (see Units 3 and 4 descriptions; see also 
                        <E T="03">Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts,</E>
                         above), constituting a total of 10,852 ha (26,817 ac) of Tribal land being proposed as critical habitat. We will continue to work with tribal entities during the development of a final rule for the designation of critical habitat for the Florida bonneted bat.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD2">Clarity of the Rule</HD>
                    <P>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:</P>
                    <P>(1) Be logically organized;</P>
                    <P>(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;</P>
                    <P>(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;</P>
                    <P>(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and</P>
                    <P>(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.</P>
                    <P>
                        If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in 
                        <E T="02">ADDRESSES</E>
                        . To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">References Cited</HD>
                    <P>
                        A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available on the internet at 
                        <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                         in Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106 and upon request from the South Florida Ecological Services Office (see 
                        <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E>
                        ).
                    </P>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Authors</HD>
                    <P>The primary authors of this proposed rulemaking are the staff members of the South Florida Ecological Services Office.</P>
                    <LSTSUB>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17</HD>
                        <P>Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.</P>
                    </LSTSUB>
                    <HD SOURCE="HD1">Proposed Regulation Promulgation</HD>
                    <P>Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:</P>
                    <PART>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS</HD>
                    </PART>
                    <AMDPAR>1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <AUTH>
                        <HD SOURCE="HED">Authority:</HD>
                        <P>16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless otherwise noted.</P>
                    </AUTH>
                    <AMDPAR>2. In § 17.11(h), revise the entry for “Bat, Florida bonneted” under “MAMMALS” in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to read as follows:</AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 17.11 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Endangered and threatened wildlife.</SUBJECT>
                        <STARS/>
                        <P>(h)  * * * </P>
                        <GPOTABLE COLS="05" OPTS="L1,i1" CDEF="s50,r50,r50,12C,r100">
                            <TTITLE> </TTITLE>
                            <BOXHD>
                                <CHED H="1">Common name</CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Scientific name</CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Where listed</CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Status</CHED>
                                <CHED H="1">Listing citations and applicable rules</CHED>
                            </BOXHD>
                            <ROW EXPSTB="04" RUL="s">
                                <ENT I="21">
                                    <E T="02">Mammals</E>
                                </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW EXPSTB="00">
                                <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="28">*         *         *         *         *         *         *</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="01">Bat, Florida bonneted</ENT>
                                <ENT>
                                    <E T="03">Eumops floridanus</E>
                                </ENT>
                                <ENT>Wherever found</ENT>
                                <ENT>E</ENT>
                                <ENT>
                                    78 FR 61003, 10/2/2013; 50 CFR 17.95(a).
                                    <SU>CH</SU>
                                </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="22"> </ENT>
                            </ROW>
                            <ROW>
                                <ENT I="28">*         *         *         *         *         *         *</ENT>
                            </ROW>
                        </GPOTABLE>
                    </SECTION>
                    <AMDPAR>
                        3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (a) by adding an entry for “Florida Bonneted Bat (
                        <E T="03">Eumops floridanus</E>
                        )” in the same alphabetical order that the species appears in the table at § 17.11 (h), to read as follows:
                    </AMDPAR>
                    <SECTION>
                        <SECTNO>§ 17.95 </SECTNO>
                        <SUBJECT>Critical habitat—fish and wildlife.</SUBJECT>
                        <P>
                            (a) 
                            <E T="03">Mammals.</E>
                        </P>
                        <HD SOURCE="HD3">
                            Florida Bonneted Bat (
                            <E T="03">Eumops floridanus</E>
                            )
                        </HD>
                        <P>(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Lee, Miami-Dade, Monroe, and Sarasota Counties, Florida, on the maps in this entry.</P>
                        <P>
                            (2) Within these areas, the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Florida bonneted bat consist of one or more of the following components:
                            <PRTPAGE P="35539"/>
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (i) Representative forest types (all age classes) that support the Florida bonneted bat by providing roosting and foraging habitat within its core areas (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             Polk, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Monroe, and Miami-Dade Counties), including:
                        </P>
                        <P>(A) Pine flatwoods;</P>
                        <P>(B) Scrubby pine flatwoods;</P>
                        <P>(C) Pine rocklands;</P>
                        <P>(D) Royal palm hammocks;</P>
                        <P>(E) Mixed or hardwood hammocks;</P>
                        <P>(F) Cypress;</P>
                        <P>(G) Mixed or hardwood wetlands;</P>
                        <P>(H) Mangroves (mature and pristine);</P>
                        <P>(I) Cabbage palms; and</P>
                        <P>(J) Sand pine scrub.</P>
                        <P>(ii) Habitat that provides for roosting and rearing of offspring; such habitat provides structural features for rest, digestion of food, social interaction, mating, rearing of young, protection from sunlight and adverse weather conditions, and cover to reduce predation risks for adults and young, and includes forest and other areas with tall or mature trees and other natural areas with suitable structures, which are generally characterized by:</P>
                        <P>(A) Tall or mature live or dead trees, tree snags, and trees with cavities, hollows, crevices, or loose bark, including, but not limited to, trees greater than 10 meters (33 feet) in height, greater than 20 centimeters (8 inches) in diameter at breast height, with cavities greater than 5 meters (16 feet) high off the ground;</P>
                        <P>
                            (B) High incidence of tall or mature live trees with various deformities (
                            <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                             large cavities, hollows, broken tops, loose bark, and other evidence of decay);
                        </P>
                        <P>(C) Sufficient open space for Florida bonneted bats to fly; areas may include open or semi-open canopy, canopy gaps, and edges, or above the canopy, which provide relatively uncluttered conditions; and/or</P>
                        <P>(D) Rock crevices.</P>
                        <P>(iii) Habitat that provides for foraging, which may vary widely across the Florida bonneted bat's range, in accordance with ecological conditions, seasons, and disturbance regimes that influence vegetation structure and prey species distributions. Foraging habitat may be separate and relatively far distances from roosting habitat. Foraging habitat consists of:</P>
                        <P>(A) Sources for drinking water and prey, including open fresh water and permanent or seasonal freshwater wetlands, in natural or rural areas (non-urban areas);</P>
                        <P>
                            (B) Wetland and upland forests, open freshwater wetlands, and wetland and upland shrub (which provide a prey base and suitable foraging conditions (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             open habitat structure));
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (C) Natural or semi-natural habitat patches in urban or residential areas that contribute to prey base and provide suitable foraging conditions (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             open habitat structure); and/or
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (D) The presence and abundance of the bat's prey (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             large, flying insects), in sufficient quantity, availability, and diversity necessary for reproduction, development, growth, and survival.
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (iv) A dynamic disturbance regime (natural or artificial) (
                            <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                             fire, hurricanes) that maintains and regenerates forested habitat, including plant communities, open habitat structure, and temporary gaps, which is conducive to promoting a continual supply of roosting sites, prey items, and suitable foraging conditions.
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (v) Large patches (more than 40,470 hectares (100,000 acres)) of forest and associated natural or semi-natural habitat types that represent functional ecosystems with a reduced influence from humans (
                            <E T="03">i.e.,</E>
                             areas that shield the bat from human disturbance, habitat loss and degradation).
                        </P>
                        <P>(vi) Corridors, consisting of roosting and foraging habitat, that allow for population maintenance and expansion, dispersal, and connectivity among and between geographic areas for natural and adaptive movements, including those necessitated by climate change.</P>
                        <P>(vii) A subtropical climate that provides tolerable conditions for the species, such that normal behavior, successful reproduction, and rearing of offspring are possible.</P>
                        <P>(3) Critical habitat does not include human-made structures (such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on the effective date of the final rule.</P>
                        <P>
                            (4) 
                            <E T="03">Critical habitat map units.</E>
                             Data layers defining map units were created using ESRI ArcGIS mapping software along with various spatial data layers. ArcGIS was also used to calculate the size of habitat areas. The projection used in mapping and calculating distances and locations within the units was North American Albers Equal Area Conic, NAD 83. The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are available to the public at the Service's internet site, 
                            <E T="03">http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/,</E>
                             at 
                            <E T="03">http://www.regulations.gov</E>
                             at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0106, and at the field office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
                        </P>
                        <P>
                            (5) 
                            <E T="03">Note:</E>
                             Index map follows:
                        </P>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-P</BILCOD>
                        <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="575">
                            <PRTPAGE P="35540"/>
                            <GID>EP10JN20.000</GID>
                        </GPH>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-C</BILCOD>
                        <P>(6) Unit 1: Peace River and surrounding areas; Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, and Sarasota Counties, Florida.</P>
                        <P>
                            (i) 
                            <E T="03">General description:</E>
                             Unit 1 consists of 19,550 ha (48,310 ac) of lands in Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, and Sarasota Counties, Florida. This unit is located along the Peace River and its tributaries (
                            <E T="03">e.g.,</E>
                             Charlie Creek), south of CR-64, with the majority generally west of US-17. Land ownership within this unit consists of approximately 4,537 ha (11,212 ac) of State-owned land, 119 ha (295 ac) of County-owned land, 13 ha (32 ac) of locally owned land, 14,087 ha (34,810 ac) of private and other lands, and 793 ha (1,960 ac) of land of unidentified ownership. The largest land holding within this unit is the RV Griffin Reserve. Other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit.
                        </P>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-P</BILCOD>
                        <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="575">
                            <PRTPAGE P="35541"/>
                            <GID>EP10JN20.001</GID>
                        </GPH>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-C</BILCOD>
                        <P>(7) Unit 2: Babcock-Webb Wildlife Management Area, Babcock Ranch, and surrounding areas; Charlotte, Lee, and Glades Counties, Florida.</P>
                        <P>
                            (i) 
                            <E T="03">General description:</E>
                             Unit 2 consists of 97,505 hectares (ha) (240,941 acres (ac)) of lands in Charlotte, Lee, and Glades Counties, Florida. The majority of Unit 2 is located in Charlotte County, east of I-75; other portions are in northern Lee and western Glades Counties. Land ownership within this unit consists of approximately 1 ha (3 ac) of Federal land, 61,128 ha (151,050 ac) of State-owned land, 3,724 ha (9,203 ac) of County-owned land, 8 ha (21 ac) of locally owned land, 32,001 ha (79,077 ac) of private and other lands, and 642 ha (1,587 ac) of land of unidentified ownership. The largest land holdings within this unit are Babcock-Webb Wildlife Management Area and Babcock Ranch Preserve; other smaller 
                            <PRTPAGE P="35542"/>
                            conservation lands also occur within this unit.
                        </P>
                        <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="352">
                            <GID>EP10JN20.002</GID>
                        </GPH>
                        <P>(8) Unit 3: Big Cypress and surrounding areas; Collier, Monroe, and Hendry Counties, Florida.</P>
                        <P>
                            (i) 
                            <E T="03">General description:</E>
                             Unit 3 consists of 366,833 ha (906,462 ac) of lands in Collier, Monroe, and Hendry Counties, Florida. The majority of Unit 3 is located in Collier County, south of I-75; the remainder occurs in southern Hendry County and mainland portions of Monroe County. Land ownership within this unit consists of approximately 250,733 ha (619,573 ac) of Federal land, 10,527 ha (26,012 ac) of Tribal land, 61,869 ha (152,882 ac) of State-owned land, 3,384 ha (8,362 ac) of County-owned land, 173 ha (427 ac) of locally owned land, 38,227 ha (94,460 ac) of private and other lands, and 1,920 ha (4,745 ac) of land of unidentified ownership. The largest land holdings within Unit 3 are Big Cypress National Preserve, Picayune Strand State Forest, Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park, Everglades National Park, and Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. Other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit.
                        </P>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-P</BILCOD>
                        <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="575">
                            <PRTPAGE P="35543"/>
                            <GID>EP10JN20.003</GID>
                        </GPH>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-C</BILCOD>
                        <P>(9) Unit 4: Miami-Dade Natural Areas; Miami-Dade County, Florida.</P>
                        <P>
                            (i) 
                            <E T="03">General description:</E>
                             Unit 4 consists of 114,372 ha (282,620 ac), most of which are conservation lands and occur west of the Florida Turnpike, in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Land ownership within this unit consists of approximately 71,385 ha (176,395 ac) of Federal land, 326 ha (805 ac) of Tribal land, 26,159 ha (64,639 ac) of State-owned land, 4,210 ha (10,404 ac) of County-owned land, 114 ha (281 ac) of locally owned land, 11,496 ha (28,408 ac) of private and other lands, and 683 ha (1,688 ac) of land of unidentified ownership. The largest land holding within this unit is Everglades National Park; other smaller conservation lands also occur within this unit.
                        </P>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-P</BILCOD>
                        <GPH SPAN="3" DEEP="575">
                            <PRTPAGE P="35544"/>
                            <GID>EP10JN20.004</GID>
                        </GPH>
                        <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-C</BILCOD>
                        <STARS/>
                    </SECTION>
                    <SIG>
                        <NAME>Aurelia Skipwith,</NAME>
                        <TITLE>Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.</TITLE>
                    </SIG>
                </SUPLINF>
                <FRDOC>[FR Doc. 2020-10840 Filed 6-9-20; 8:45 am]</FRDOC>
                <BILCOD>BILLING CODE 4333-15-C</BILCOD>
            </PRORULE>
        </PRORULES>
    </NEWPART>
</FEDREG>
