The NRC is issuing a revision to an existing guide in the NRC's “Regulatory Guide” series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public information regarding methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the agency's regulations, techniques that the NRC staff uses in evaluating specific issues or postulated events, and data that the NRC staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses.

The proposed Revision 1 of RG 5.77 was issued with a temporary identification number of draft Regulatory Guide (DG) 5044. On January 4, 2016, the NRC sent an email (ML16007A565) transmitting the DG for comment to cleared stakeholders who demonstrated a need-to-know and possessed the required access clearance. The stakeholders' comment period closed on March 4, 2016. Stakeholders' comments on DG-5044 and the staff responses to the public comments are available under ADAMS Accession No. ML22152A224.

The NRC did not announce the availability of the draft RG for public comment because the guide was originally marked as containing information designated as “Official Use Only-Security Related Information.” The Commission directed the NRC staff to edit the document for consistency, accuracy, formatting, and a determination regarding which content should be marked “Unclassified” and “Official Use Only—Security Related Information” in accordance with Staff Requirement Memorandum (SRM)—SECY-17-0095—Review and Approval of Proposed Revision to RG 5.77, “Insider Mitigation Program,” dated July 14, 2021 (ADAMS Accession No. ML21195A356). The staff critically examined the designation of the document and determined it should not be designated as “Official Use Only—Security Related Information.” In consideration of the stakeholders' comments and the SRM, the staff revised the document and is issuing this notice to inform the public of the issuance of the final RG.

This RG is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act.

Revision 1 of RG 5.77 describes methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the NRC's regulations to meet the regulatory requirements in paragraphs 73.55(b)(9) and 73.55(b)(9)(ii) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), such that a licensee shall establish, maintain, and implement an Insider Mitigation Program (IMP) and shall describe the program in the Physical Security Plan. The IMP must contain elements from the following licensee programs: access authorization, fitness-for-duty, cyber security, and physical protection. Issuance of this RG, would not constitute backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109, “Backfitting,” and as described in NRC Management Directive (MD) 8.4, “Management of Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue Finality, and Information Requests,” constitute forward fitting as that term is defined and described in MD 8.4; or affect the issue finality of any approval issued under 10 CFR part 52, “Licenses, certifications, and approvals for nuclear power plants.” As explained in RG 5.77, applicants and licensees would not be required to comply with the positions set forth in RG 5.77.

A member of the public may, at any time, submit suggestions to the NRC for improvement of existing RGs or for the development of new RGs. Suggestions can be submitted on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-guides/contactus.html. Suggestions will be considered in future updates and enhancements to the “Regulatory Guide” series.

On May 16, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate that section 304 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”) violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. 142 S.Ct. 1638 (2022). The Supreme Court's ruling affirmed the same holding of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Ted Cruz for Senate v. Federal Election Commission, 542 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2021). The Commission is now removing the regulations implementing this unconstitutional statute.

The Commission is taking this action without advance notice and comment because it falls under the “good cause” exception of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The revisions set forth herein are necessary to conform the Commission's regulations to the Supreme Court's holding that the statutory restrictions on authorized committees' repayment of candidate personal loans are unconstitutional. Ted Cruz for Senate, 142 S.Ct. at 1656. Because this action does not involve any Commission discretion or policy judgments, notice and comment are unnecessary. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), (d)(3). A pre-publication notice and comment period would also be contrary to the public interest because the 2022 election campaigns for Federal office are ongoing, and so the delay that would result in such a notice and comment period might cause confusion among Federal candidates and the public as to the enforceability of the regulations addressed below. Id.

Moreover, because this interim final rule is exempt from the APA's notice and comment procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Commission is not required to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603 or 604. See 5 U.S.C. 601(a), 604(a).

Before final promulgation of any rules or regulations to carry out the provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act (“the Act”), the Commission transmits the rules or regulations to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate for a thirty-legislative-day review period. 52 U.S.C. 30111(d). The effective date of this final rule is November 30, 2022.

The Act provides two methods for the funding of Federal campaigns. First, funding may come from individual contributions to the campaign, which are subject to a per-election limits. See 52 U.S.C. 30116(a)(1)(A) (placing limits on contributions from individuals to candidates and their authorized political committees). Second, candidates may self-finance their campaigns, with no limits on the amount a candidate may contribute to his or her campaign committee. 11 CFR 110.10; see also Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 51-54 (1976) (holding that restriction on candidate's personal expenditures is unconstitutional).

At the same time, however, section 304 of BCRA places limits on candidates' ability to finance their campaigns through personal loans. Under that statutory provision, a candidate's authorized committee may repay all of a candidate's personal loans with contributions made before or on the date of the election, but may repay only up to $250,000 of a candidate's pre-election loans with post-election contributions. 52 U.S.C. 30116(j). Under the Commission's implementing regulations, for personal loan amounts that in the aggregate exceed $250,000, a campaign “[m]ay repay the entire amount of the personal loans using contributions” made before or on the date of the election, 11 CFR 116.1(b)(2), but “it must do so within 20 days of the election,” 11 CFR 116.11(b)(1); (c)(1). If using post-election contributions, a campaign may repay only up to $250,000 of the personal loans. 11 CFR 116.11(b)(2); 11 CFR 116.12.

On May 16, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that section 304 of BCRA violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court's ruling affirmed the same holding of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Ted Cruz for Senate v. Federal Election Commission, 542 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2021). Accordingly, the Commission is removing the regulations implementing this unconstitutional statutory provision.

Section 110.1(b)(3)(i) provides that contributions to a campaign for a particular election after the election has taken place may be made only to the extent that the contribution does not exceed a committee's net debts outstanding from such election. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(i). The following paragraph (ii) further provides how net debts outstanding shall be determined, and it states that an authorized committee must reduce its calculated net debts by any outstanding candidate personal loan amounts more than $250,000. 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii)(C). The regulation that reduces the calculation of net debts based on candidate personal loans exceeding $250,000 was issued as a conforming edit to the regulations, 11 CFR 116.11 and 116.12 ( see below), that implemented the statutory limitation on an authorized committee's repayment of candidate personal loans exceeding that amount. Increased Contribution and Coordinated Party Expenditure Limits for Candidates Opposing Self-Financed Candidates, 68 FR 3970, 3973 (Jan. 27, 2003). The Commission is removing 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii)(C) and making technical edits to 11 CFR 110.1(b)(3)(ii)(A) and (B).

Section 116.11 implements section 304 of BCRA and provides for relevant limitations on the repayment of candidate personal loans aggregating in excess of $250,000 by an authorized committee. 11 CFR 116.11. The Commission is removing § 116.11 in its entirety.

Section 116.12 provides that a campaign committee is authorized to repay a candidate's personal loans less than $250,000 with contributions made before, on, or after the date of the election. 11 CFR 116.2. The Commission is removing § 116.12 in its entirety.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Election Commission amends 11 CFR chapter I as follows:

EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0279, dated December 15, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0279) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model Airbus A318-111, A318-112, A318-121, A318-122, A319-111, A319-112, A319-113, A319-114, A319-115, A319-131, A319-132, A319-133, A319-151N, A319-153N, A319-171N, A320-211, A320-212, A320-214, A320-215, A320-216, A320-231, A320-232, A320-233, A320-251N, A320-252N, A320-253N, A320-271N, A320-272N, A320-273N, A321-111, A321-112, A321-131, A321-211, A321-212, A321-213, A321-231, A321-232, A321-251N, A321-251NX, A321-252N, A321-252NX, A321-253N, A321-253NX, A321-271N, A321-271NX, A321-272N, and A321-272NX airplanes. Model A320-215 airplanes are not certificated by the FAA and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this AD therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability.

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 13, 2022 (87 FR 35684). The NPRM was prompted by unclear and incomplete placard instructions for the doghouse door lock. The NPRM proposed to require installing improved handling instruction placards on affected doghouses and re-identifying the doghouses, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0279. The NPRM also proposed to prohibit the installation of affected doghouses under certain conditions.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address the possible failure of the doghouse door lock latch, which could result in locking the door in the closed position and preventing access to the emergency equipment in the doghouse, possibly resulting in injury to occupants. See the MCAI for additional background information.

The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

EASA AD 2021-0279 specifies procedures for installing improved handling instruction placards on affected doghouses and re-identifying the doghouses, and prohibits installation of affected doghouses under certain conditions. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

The FAA estimates that this AD would affect 1,825 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included all known costs in the cost estimate.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0281, dated December 17, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0281) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus SAS Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, and -243F airplanes, Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, -343, and -743L airplanes. Model A330-743L airplanes are not certificated by the FAA and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this AD therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability.

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2020-22-03, Amendment 39-21299 (85 FR 66873, October 21, 2020) (AD 2020-22-03). AD 2020-22-03 applied to all Airbus SAS Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2022 (87 FR 36266). The NPRM was prompted by the development of new maintenance actions and software related to over-temperature failure conditions. The NPRM proposed to continue to require the actions specified in AD 2020-22-03, to require accomplishing the new maintenance tasks and corrective actions, and to mandate embodiment of the updated FWC software for certain airplanes, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0281. The NPRM also proposed to prohibit the installation of affected FWC software.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address the possibility of a jammed engine bleed valve, which could lead to damage of the bleed manifold and the ducts downstream of the engine bleed system, exposure of the surrounding structure to heat stress, and possible reduced structural integrity of the airplane. See the MCAI for additional background information.

The FAA received a comment from the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) who supported the NPRM without change.

The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

EASA AD 2021-0281 specifies procedures for amending the applicable AFM to incorporate procedures to be applied if an engine bleed over-temperature occurs when the associated engine bleed valve is jammed open. EASA AD 2020-0281 also specifies that embodiment of updated FWC software standard T9 eliminates the need for the AFM amendment. EASA AD 2021-0281 also describes maintenance tasks for failures related to over-temperature conditions and corrective actions (repair). EASA AD 2021-0281 also specifies procedures for the embodiment of updated FWC software standard T9-3, and, for certain airplanes concurrent embodiment of system data acquisition concentrator (SDAC) software standard C13 or FWC software standard K3-2 and SDAC software standard C3-0A. Finally, EASA AD 2021-0281 prohibits the installation of affected FWC software (FWC software standard T9-2 or earlier). This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 115 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA has received no definitive data that enables the agency to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2022-0013, dated January 25, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0013) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 airplanes.

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 17, 2022 (87 FR 36418). The NPRM was prompted by a report indicating that following the introduction of the IFAR system on single lane slide-rafts, the IFAR demonstrated inconsistent release behavior due to interference or entanglement of the upper part of the IFAR with the slide-raft cover or door structure in aft wind conditions. These affected slide-rafts are installed at passenger door 3, left-hand and right-hand sides. The NPRM proposed to require replacing an affected part with a serviceable part, as specified in EASA AD 2022-0013. The NPRM also proposed to prohibit the installation of affected parts.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address inconsistent release of single lane slide-rafts having the IFAR system, which if not corrected, could result in a slide-raft being unusable during an emergency and impair the safe evacuation of occupants. See the MCAI for additional background information.

The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

EASA AD 2022-0013 specifies procedures for replacing escape slide-rafts having certain part numbers (affected parts) with serviceable parts (which includes parts that have been modified and re-identified). EASA AD 2022-0013 also prohibits the installation of affected parts on any airplane. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 30 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators. The FAA does not control warranty coverage for affected operators. As a result, the FAA has included all known costs in the cost estimate.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “Docket No. FAA-2022-1069; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01175-T” at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.

Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone 206-231-3229; email Vladimir.Ulyanov@faa.gov. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

On August 18, 2022, the FAA issued Emergency AD 2022-18-51 for all Airbus SAS Model A330-841 and -941 airplanes. Emergency AD 2022-18-51 was prompted by MCAI originated by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union. EASA issued EASA Emergency AD 2022-0170-E, dated August 17, 2022 (EASA Emergency AD 2022-0170-E), to correct an unsafe condition identified as leaking bleed system HPVs, likely due to HPV clip failure and sealing ring damage.

Emergency AD 2022-18-51 required revising the existing AFM to incorporate additional limitations prohibiting takeoff for certain airplane configurations; specified airplane dispatch restrictions using certain provisions of the A330 MMEL or amending the existing FAA-approved operator's MEL; and required obtaining and accomplishing instructions following certain maintenance messages. The FAA issued Emergency AD 2022-18-51 to address a leaking HPV, which may expose the pressure regulating valve (PRV), which is installed downstream from the HPV, to high pressure, possibly damaging the PRV itself and preventing its closure. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in high pressure and temperatures in the duct downstream from the PRV, with possible duct burst, damage to several systems, and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

Since the FAA issued Emergency AD 2022-18-51, EASA superseded its Emergency AD 2022-0170-E and issued EASA AD 2022-0181, dated August 29, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0181) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS A330-841 and -941 airplanes. The MCAI states that Airbus has since published service information providing maintenance actions including repetitive replacement of the HPV clips and AFM and MMEL updates that provide additional instructions and maintenance procedures to address failures of the HPV.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1069.

Although this AD does not explicitly restate the requirements of Emergency AD 2022-18-51, this AD retains all of the requirements of Emergency AD 2022-18-51. Those requirements are referenced in EASA AD 2022-0181, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of this AD.

EASA AD 2022-0181 retains the following actions from EASA Emergency AD 2022-0170-E: revision of the existing AFM to incorporate limitations prohibiting takeoff for certain airplane configurations; airplane dispatch restrictions using certain provisions of the A330 MMEL or amendment of the existing FAA-approved operator's MEL; and actions following certain maintenance messages.

EASA AD 2022-0181 also specifies the following required actions:

• Revision of the Limitations section of the existing AFM to provide procedures to mitigate the risk of a non-isolated overpressure or overtemperature in the case of an excessive leak of the engine bleed HPV.

• Implementation of the instructions of the MMEL update on the basis of which the operator's MEL must be amended with new provisions and procedures for the following items: Air Conditioning Pack, Engine Bleed Air Supply System, Engine Bleed IP (Intermediate Pressure) Check Valve, and Engine Bleed HP Valve.

• A seal integrity test of each HPV, and corrective actions (including replacing the HPV, and a detailed inspection of the wing bellow on engine 1(2) and replacement of any damaged or deformed wing bellow).

EASA AD 2022-0181 also describes the following maintenance instructions to be accomplished following certain faults or failures:

• HPV troubleshooting procedure and additional maintenance actions after any Class 1 maintenance message associated to an HPV fault, and corrective actions (including replacing HPV or wing bellow).

• HPV seal integrity test and the additional maintenance actions after any Class 1 or Class 2 maintenance message associated to a PRV fault, and corrective actions (including replacing the HPV and PRV, and a detailed inspection of the wing bellow on engine 1(2) and replacement of any damaged or deformed wing bellow).

• A visual (borescope) inspection of the engine bleed air system (EBAS) to detect signs of foreign object debris (FOD), including metallic debris in the butterfly valve and dents or damage of the flaps of the intermediate pressure check valve (IPCV), and dents and missing segments in the PRV, the header of the high pressure/intermediate pressure (HP/IP) duct, the y-duct, and the pylon ducts after any failure of an HPV clip and/or any of the HPV butterfly sealing rings, and corrective actions (including removing FOD and replacing the IPCV or PRV).

• A seal integrity test of each HPV after any take-off or go-around accomplished with “packs OFF” or “APU bleed ON” or “engine bleed OFF,” and corrective actions (including replacing the HPV, and a detailed inspection of the wing bellow on engine 1(2) and replacement of any damaged or deformed wing bellow).

• Contacting Airbus for instructions after any HPV troubleshooting procedure if any Class 1 maintenance message occurs associated with an HPV fault.

• Initial and repetitive replacement of each HPV clip with a new HPV clip.

• Reporting to Airbus of any failure detected during the accomplishment of any maintenance action, seal integrity test, or visual inspection specified in EASA AD 2022-0181.

This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI described above. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD 2022-0181 described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD, and except as discussed under “Differences Between this AD and the MCAI.”

In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, EASA AD 2022-0181 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD requires compliance with EASA AD 2022-0181 through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section in EASA AD 2022-0181 does not mean that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to “all required actions and compliance times,” compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section titled “Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)” in EASA AD 2022-0181. Service information required by EASA AD 2022-0181 for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1069 after this AD is published.

EASA AD 2022-0181 requires operators to inform all flightcrews of revisions to the existing AFM and MEL, and thereafter to operate the airplane accordingly. However, this AD does not specifically require those actions, as those actions are already required by FAA regulations. FAA regulations require operators to furnish to pilots any changes to the AFM (for example, 14 CFR 121.137), and to ensure the pilots are familiar with the AFM (for example, 14 CFR 91.505). As with any other flightcrew training requirement, training on the updated AFM content is tracked by the operators and recorded in each pilot's training record, which is available for the FAA to review. FAA regulations also require pilots to follow the procedures in the AFM including all updates. 14 CFR 91.9 requires that any person operating a civil aircraft must comply with the operating limitations specified in the AFM. Furthermore, FAA regulations (14 CFR 121.628(a)(2)) require operators to provide pilots with access to all of the information contained in the operator's MEL. Furthermore, 14 CFR 121.628(a)(5) requires airplanes to be operated under all applicable conditions and limitations contained in the operator's MEL. Therefore, including a requirement in this AD to operate the airplane according to the revised AFM and MEL would be redundant and unnecessary.

Paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2022-0181 prohibits the dispatch of an airplane under specified provisions of the A330 MMEL items. This AD alternatively allows revising the operator's existing FAA-approved MEL by removing the items specified in paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2022-0181.

The FAA considers that this AD is an interim action. The FAA anticipates that further AD action will follow.

Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. ) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when the agency, for “good cause,” finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under this section, an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days, upon a finding of good cause.

An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies forgoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because a leaking HPV may expose the PRV to high pressure, possibly damaging the PRV itself and preventing its closure, which could lead to high pressure and temperatures in the duct downstream from the PRV, with possible duct burst, damage to several systems, and consequent loss of control of the airplane. The FAA considers a leaking HPV to be an urgent safety issue. The actions retained from the emergency AD must be performed before further flight; however, these actions on their own do not fully mitigate the unsafe condition. The new actions required by this AD will further mitigate the unsafe condition, and certain actions are required for compliance before further flight. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and comment.

The requirements of the RFA do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 15 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required or optional actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

The FAA has no definitive data on which to base the cost estimate for the maintenance actions or additional actions specified in this AD.

The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the on-condition reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the cost of reporting discrepancies on U.S. operators to be $85 per product, per incident.

A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to take approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2022-0012, dated January 24, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0012), to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus Helicopters (AH), formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale, Model AS 332 C, AS 332 C1, AS 332 L, and AS 332 L1 helicopters.

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, and AS332L1 helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 29, 2022 (87 FR 38689). The NPRM was prompted by review of maintenance instructions that showed conflicting methods of recording torque cycles for certain parts. The NPRM proposed to require recalculating the torque cycles of certain parts and updating log cards; removing certain other parts from service; and applying an operational restriction on certain parts, as specified in EASA AD 2022-0012. The NPRM also proposed to require incorporating the re-calculated life limits into existing maintenance records.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address under-calculated torque cycle accumulations and prevent a part from remaining in service beyond its fatigue life. See EASA AD 2022-0012 for additional background information.

The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the costs.

These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA about the unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these helicopters.

EASA AD 2022-0012 requires recalculating the torque cycles of certain affected parts, updating log cards, and replacing those parts before exceeding their recalculated service life limits. EASA AD 2022-0012 also requires removing certain other affected parts from service and prohibits installing those parts. Lastly, EASA AD 2022-0012 applies an operational restriction to certain affected parts.

The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS332-01.00.76, Revision 1, dated March 8, 2022 (ASB AS332-01.00.76, Rev 1). This service information specifies procedures for determining the corrected accumulated torque cycles and updating the log cards for certain parts, new life limits expressed in torque cycles, and new procedures for counting torque cycles.

This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

The FAA has previously mandated airworthiness limitations by mandating each airworthiness limitation task ( e.g., inspections and replacements (life limits)) as an AD requirement or issuing ADs that require revising the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the existing maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness to incorporate new or revised inspections and life limits. This AD, however, requires operators to incorporate into maintenance records required by 14 CFR 91.417(a)(2) or 135.439(a)(2), as applicable for your helicopter, the requirements (airworthiness limitations) specified in service information required by a civil aviation authority AD. The FAA does not intend this as a substantive change. For these ADs, the ALS requirements for operators are the same but are complied with differently. Requiring the incorporation of the new ALS requirements into the maintenance records, rather than requiring individual ALS tasks ( e.g., repetitive inspections and replacements), requires operators to record AD compliance once after updating the maintenance records, rather than after every time the ALS task is completed.

EASA AD 2022-0012 allows using Airbus Helicopters ASB No. AS332- 01.00.76, Revision 0, dated December 16, 2021, for corrective actions; whereas this AD does not and instead requires using ASB AS332-01.00.76, Rev 1. EASA AD 2022-0012 requires replacing each affected part before exceeding its re-calculated life limit; whereas this AD requires, within 30 days after the effective date of the AD, incorporating the re-calculated life limits into maintenance records required by 14 CFR 91.417(a)(2) or 135.439(a)(2), as applicable for your helicopter.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 7 helicopters of U.S. Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD.

Recalculating the torque cycles and updating maintenance records takes about 4 work-hours for an estimated cost of about $340 per helicopter and $2,380 for the U.S. fleet. Incorporating actions and associated thresholds and intervals, including life limits and maintenance tasks, into maintenance records, takes about 2 work-hours for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $1,190 for the U.S. fleet. Replacing a main rotor shaft takes about 40 work-hours and parts cost about $175,684 for an estimated cost of $179,084. Replacing a main gearbox flexible mounting plate support takes about 80 work-hours and parts cost about $57,457 for an estimated cost of $64,257.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, effective September 15, 2021, listed Class A, B, C, D and E airspace areas; air traffic service routes; and reporting points. Due to the length of these descriptions, the FAA requested approval from the Office of the Federal Register to incorporate the material by reference in the Federal Aviation Regulations § 71.1, effective September 15, 2021, through September 15, 2022. During the incorporation by reference period, the FAA processed all proposed changes of the airspace listings in FAA Order JO 7400.11F in full text as proposed rule documents in the Federal Register , unless there was good cause to forego notice and comment. Likewise, all amendments of these listings were published in full text as final rules in the Federal Register . This rule reflects the periodic integration of these final rule amendments into a revised edition of FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points. The Director of the Federal Register has approved the incorporation by reference of FAA Order JO 7400.11G in section 71.1, as of September 15, 2022, through September 15, 2023. This rule also explains the procedures the FAA will use to amend the airspace designations incorporated by reference in part 71. This rule also updates sections 71.5, 71.15, 71.31, 71.33, 71.41, 71.51, 71.61, 71.71, and 71.901 to reflect the incorporation by reference of FAA Order JO 7400.11G.

This document incorporates by reference FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022, in section 71.1. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this final rule. FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 to reflect the approval by the Director of the Federal Register of the incorporation by reference of FAA Order JO 7400.11G, effective September 15, 2022, through September 15, 2023. During the incorporation by reference period, the FAA will continue to process all proposed changes of the airspace listings in FAA Order JO 7400.11G in full text as proposed rule documents in the Federal Register , unless there is good cause to forego notice and comment. Likewise, all amendments of these listings will be published in full text as final rules in the Federal Register . The FAA will periodically integrate all final rule amendments into a revised edition of FAA Order JO 7400.11, and submit the revised edition to the Director of the Federal Register for approval for incorporation by reference in section 71.1.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA has determined that this action: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. This action neither places any new restrictions or requirements on the public, nor changes the dimensions or operation requirements of the airspace listings incorporated by reference in part 71.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the NAS.

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2022-0827 in the Federal Register (87 FR 41633; July 13, 2022), amending 4 jet routes and removing 8 jet routes in the eastern United States. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were received.

Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The jet routes listed in this document will be subsequently published in and removed from FAA Order JO 7400.11.

The NPRM did not address an error in the description of jet route J-68 as published in FAA Order JO 7400.11F that misidentified the state for the Gopher VORTAC as MI instead of MN. The description of J-68 in the NPRM and this rule is correct.

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending 4 jet routes and removing 8 jet routes in the eastern United States. This action is associated with the Northeast Corridor Atlantic Coast Route Project, and supports the VOR MON Program. Additionally, the jet route changes reduce aeronautical chart clutter by removing unneeded route segments.

The route changes are as follows:

J-14: J-14 extends from Panhandle, TX to Vulcan, AL; and From Greensboro, NC to Patuxent, MD. This action removes the segments from Greensboro, NC, to Patuxent, MD. This supports the decommissioning of the Patuxent VHF Omnidirectional Range and Tactical Air Navigational System (VORTAC). Existing Area Navigation (RNAV) Q routes, Q-22 and Q-60, partially overlay this segment.

J-24: J-24 extends from Myton, UT, to Hayden, CO; and From Hugo, CO, to Harcum, VA. This removes the segment from Flat Rock, VA, to Harcum, VA. This segment of the route is no longer used by air traffic control (ATC). Other Performance Based Navigation (PBN) route structure is being implemented to reflect current traffic flows in the area. As amended, J-24 extends from Myton, UT, to Hayden, CO; and From Hugo, CO, to Montebello, VA.

J-52: J-52 extends from Vancouver, BC, Canada, to Vulcan, AL; and From the intersection of the Columbia, SC, 042°, and the Flat Rock, VA, 212° radials to Richmond, VA. The FAA is removing the segments between Bigbee, MS, and Vulcan, AL; and the segments between the intersection of Columbia, SC, and Flat Rock, VA, radials and Richmond, VA. RNAV routes Q-87, Q-99, and Q-122 will be extended to replace the segments of J-52. As amended, J-52 extends from Vancouver, BC, Canada, to Sidon, MS.

J-68: J-68 extends from Gopher, MN, to Flint, MI; and From Hancock, NY, to Nantucket, MA. This action removes the segments from Hancock, NY to Nantucket, MA. These segments are no longer used by ATC. Other PBN route structure will be implemented to reflect current air traffic flows in the area. As amended, J-68 extends from Gopher, MN, to Flint, MI.

J-165: J-165 extends from the intersection of the Charleston, SC 025° and the Florence, SC 085° radials to Richmond, VA. The route is cancelled in its entirety. RNAV route Q-99 will be extended as a partial overlay and replacement of J-165.

J-207: J-207 extends from Florence, SC, to Franklin, VA. This action removes J-207 in its entirety. RNAV route Q-87 will be extended as a substitute for J-207.

J-506: J-506 extends from Millinocket, ME to the intersection of the St John, NB, 267° radial and the United States/Canadian border. The FAA is removing J-506 in its entirety. This route is no longer used by ATC. Currently, RNAV routes Q-947 and Q-806 exist in this area.

J-561: J-561 extends from Presque Isle, ME, to Mont Joli, PQ, Canada. This route is no longer used by ATC. The FAA is removing the route in its entirety.

J-563: J-563 extends from Albany, NY, to Sherbrooke, PQ, Canada. This route is no longer used by ATC. The Sherbrooke VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) has been decommissioned by NavCanada. This action removes the route in its entirety.

J-573: J-573 extends from Kennebunk, ME, to St John, NB, Canada. The route is no longer used by ATC. The FAA is removing J-573 in its entirety.

J-582: J-582 extends from Presque Isle, ME to Sept Isle, PQ, Canada. The route is no longer used by ATC. This action removes the route in its entirety.

J-585: J-585 extends from Nantucket, MA, to Yarmouth, NS, Canada. This route is no longer used by ATC. This action removes the route in its entirety.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA has determined that this action of amending four jet routes, and removing eight jet routes, in the eastern United States qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5b, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review “Actions regarding establishment of jet routes and Federal airways (see 14 CFR 71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways ) . . .”. As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA has determined no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would modify the route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System (NAS).

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2022-0823 in the Federal Register (87 FR 41635; July 13, 2022), removing four VOR Federal airways in the eastern United States. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were received.

Domestic VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways listed in this document will be removed subsequently from FAA Order JO 7400.11.

The NPRM also proposed to remove VOR Federal airway V-146. Subsequently, it was decided to retain airway V-146 to conduct additional coordination. Further action on airway V-146 is delayed to a later date.

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by removing VOR Federal Airways V-31, V-447, and V-475. The routes are removed in conjunction with VORs being decommissioned under the VOR MON Program. This program aims to improve the efficiency of the NAS by transitioning from ground based navigation systems to satellite based navigation. The FAA is removing each of these routes as described below.

V-31: V-31 extends from Patuxent River, MD, to the intersection of the Rochester, NY, 279° and the Buffalo, NY 023° radials. The FAA is removing the route in its entirety. A planned Area Navigation (RNAV) route, T-445, will overlay segments of airway V-31.

V-447: V-447 extends from Cambridge, NY, to Sherbrooke, PQ, Canada. NavCanada has previously decommissioned the Sherbrook, PQ, VOR which was the end point of the route. The FAA is removing the route in its entirety.

V-475: V-475 extends from LaGuardia, NY, to Providence, RI. This route is no longer being utilized. Therefore, no RNAV overlay is planned and the FAA is removing the route in its entirety.

FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA has determined that this action of removing three VOR Federal airways in the eastern United States qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5b, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review “Actions regarding establishment of jet routes and Federal airways (see 14 CFR 71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways ) . . .”. As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA has determined no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (87 FR 52676; August 29, 2022), amending T-232 in support of a large and comprehensive T-route modernization project for the state of Alaska. Subsequent to publication, the FAA determined that the IMARE, AK, route point was inadvertently identified as a WP, in error. This rule corrects that error by changing the references of the IMARE, AK, WP to the IMARE, AK, Fix. This is an editorial change only to match the FAA's aeronautical database information and does not alter the alignment of the affected T-232 route.

United States Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV T-route listed in this document will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, references to the IMARE, AK, WP that are reflected in Docket No. FAA-2022-0026, as published in the Federal Register of August 29, 2022 (87 FR 52676), FR Doc. 2022-18426, are corrected as follows:

1. In FR Doc. 2022-18426, appearing on page 52676, in the third column, at line 20, correct “IMARE, AK, WP” to read “IMARE, AK, Fix”.

2. In FR Doc. 2022-18426, appearing on page 52677, in the third column, at line 25, correct “IMARE, AK WP (Lat. 64°33′29.60″ N, long. 147°17′20.31″ W)” to read “IMARE, AK FIX (Lat. 64°33′29.60″ N, long. 147°17′20.31″ W)”.

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2022-0824, in the Federal Register (87 FR 41632; July 13, 2022), amending RNAV route Q-81 and removing Q-947. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were received.

United States Area Navigation routes are published in paragraph 2006 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes listed in this document will be subsequently published in and removed from FAA Order JO 7400.11.

In the regulatory text for Q-81, the ZEILR point was identified as a “waypoint (WP).” This is corrected to reflect ZEILR as a “Fix.”

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending Q-81 in the southeastern United States, and removing Canadian route Q-947 in the northeastern United States.

Q-81: Q-81 extends from the TUNSL, FL, WP, to the HONID, GA, WP. This action amends the current route segments between the FIPES, OG, WP and the FARLU, FL, WP by removing the THMPR, FL, WP and the LEEHI, FL, WP and inserting the ZEILR, FL, Fix, and the PIKKR, OG, WP. The effect of this change realigns the track of Q-81 by between 1 nautical mile (NM) and 10.5 NM to the west of its current path. This change assists with traffic flow, conflict avoidance, and prevents excessive coordination for air traffic controllers. In addition, the FAA is removing the following WPs from the legal description of Q-81: MGNTY, FL; BITNY, OG; SNAPY, FL; and IPOKE, GA. Because they do not denote a route turn point, these WPs are not required to be included in the Q-81 legal description. However, these points will continue to be depicted on the IFR En Route charts because they are used for air traffic control purposes. The full description of Q-81 is listed in the amendments to part 71 set forth below.

Q-947: Q-947 is a Canadian RNAV route that is being removed at the request of NavCanada.

FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA has determined that this action of amending RNAV route Q-81 and removing Q-947 qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5b, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review “Actions regarding establishment of jet routes and Federal airways (see 14 CFR 71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways ) . . .”. As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

On June 15, 2022, BEA published a notice of proposed rulemaking that set forth the revised reporting criteria for the BE-120 Benchmark Survey of Transactions in Selected Services and Intellectual Property with Foreign Persons and that clarified when BEA's two other international services benchmark surveys, the BE-140 Benchmark Survey of Insurance Transactions by U.S. Insurance Companies with Foreign Persons and the BE-180 Benchmark Survey of Financial Services Transactions between U.S. Financial Services Providers and Foreign Persons, will be conducted (87 FR 36091). No public comments were received. This final rule amends 15 CFR part 801 to set forth the reporting requirements for the BE-120 benchmark survey and clarify when the BE-140 and BE-180 benchmark surveys will be conducted.

The BE-120 Benchmark Survey of Transactions in Selected Services and Intellectual Property with Foreign Persons is a mandatory survey and is conducted once every five years by BEA under the authority of the International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act (22 U.S.C. 3101-3108). The data reported to BEA through this survey are confidential and may be used only for analytical and statistical purposes. A response is required from persons subject to the reporting requirements of the BE-120, whether or not they are contacted by BEA.

The BE-120 benchmark survey covers the universe of selected services and intellectual property transactions of U.S. companies with foreign persons and is BEA's most comprehensive survey of such transactions. The data collected through the BE-120 are needed to monitor U.S. trade in services and intellectual property, to analyze the impact of U.S. trade in these services on the U.S. economy and on foreign economies, to compile and improve the U.S. economic accounts, to support U.S. commercial policy on trade in services, to conduct trade promotion activities, and to improve the ability of U.S. businesses to identify and evaluate market opportunities. The benchmark data will be used, in conjunction with data collected from a sample of respondents on the companion BE-125 Quarterly Survey of Transactions in Selected Services and Intellectual Property with Foreign Persons, to produce quarterly estimates of selected services and intellectual property components for BEA's international transactions accounts, national income and product accounts, and industry accounts.

This final rule amends the regulation at 15 CFR part 801 by modifying § 801.3 and 801.11 through 801.13 and removing § 801.9 to clarify the timing of the three international services benchmark surveys: the BE-120 Benchmark Survey of Transactions in Selected Services and Intellectual Property with Foreign Persons, the BE-140 Benchmark Survey of Insurance Transactions by U.S. Insurance Companies with Foreign Persons, and the BE-180 Benchmark Survey of Financial Services Transactions between U.S. Financial Services Providers and Foreign Persons. The next BE-120 survey will apply to the 2022 fiscal reporting year, and will be conducted once every five years, for reporting years ending in 2 and 7, thereafter. Additionally, the next BE-140 survey and BE-180 survey will be collected for the 2023 and 2024 reporting years, respectively, and will continue to be conducted every five years thereafter. The BE-140 will be collected for reporting years ending in 3 and 8, and the BE-140 will be collected for reporting years ending in 4 and 9. See the most recent versions of the BE-120, BE-140, and BE-180 benchmark surveys at www.bea.gov for a more detailed description of covered transactions and definitions.

Each time a benchmark survey is to be conducted, BEA will describe any proposed changes to the information collected through the survey (including the addition, deletion, and/or modification of existing questions and definitions) in a public notice and will solicit comments as part of the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Any changes to reporting requirements or significant expansions in scope of the surveys will be conducted by rulemaking.

This final rule amends the regulation at 15 CFR part 801.11 to set forth the reporting requirements for the BE-120 benchmark survey, and amends the survey form for the BE-120 benchmark in response to suggestions from data users and to allow BEA to more closely align its statistics with international guidelines and publish more information on U.S. trade in services. The amendments include several changes in data items collected and the design of the survey form relative to the 2017 benchmark survey.

BEA adds the following to the BE-120 benchmark survey form:

(1) Questions to collect information on the largest U.S. states (up to three) for sales (exports) and purchases (imports) of services. Respondents that meet the thresholds ($2 million in combined sales, and/or $1 million in combined purchases) for filing on the mandatory schedules will be required to report information for up to three U.S. states that accounted for the largest shares of their sales and purchases activity. Reporters will be instructed to consider all of their cross-border sales and purchases of services (in aggregate for all transaction types and affiliation categories) and report the U.S. states that represented the largest share of their sales and (separately) their purchases. After identifying the states, reporters will provide an estimate of the percentage of their sales and purchases that were transacted from each state.

(2) Questions to collect information on digital intermediation platforms. BEA will ask if the reporters operated a digital intermediation platform, and if so, the value of their digital intermediation sales and associated transaction categories. All BE-120 respondents that meet the thresholds for filing on the mandatory schedules will be required to respond to these questions. Survey instructions and definitions will be modified to ensure fees and commissions for sales and purchases made through digital intermediation platforms are reported in the correct transaction categories.

(3) Question on employment size class. BEA will add a question asking for the employment size class of the consolidated U.S. company. The question will ask all respondents to check a box indicating their employment size class: 0—( e.g., Sole Proprietorship), 1-19, 20-49, 50-99, 100-249, 250-499, 500-999, 1,000-9,999, greater than 10,000. BEA has modified the size categories that were in the proposed rule to enhance the utility of the data collected.

Additionally, BEA will modify the remote services schedules (Schedules D and E) to better capture trade in digitally delivered services. Survey instructions will direct reporters to provide an estimate of the percentage of services that were provided remotely from the U.S. Reporter's domestic offices to foreign persons and to the U.S. Reporter's domestic offices from foreign persons via information and communications technology networks (via the internet, mobile device, extranet, telephone, fax, video conference, or other comparable online system). Services provided via in-person meetings, or postal or private delivery will be excluded. The percentage reported should reflect all interactions with the customer, not just the delivery of the final product.

BEA will delete the following two items from the BE-120 benchmark survey:

(1) Transaction categories for “Other intellectual property” will be eliminated. Rights to use other intellectual property (code 8.1), rights to reproduce and/or distribute other intellectual property (code 8.2), and outright sales or purchases of proprietary rights related to other intellectual property (code 8.3) will no longer be collected. Reporters will be instructed to reclassify transactions in these categories to research and development (R&D) services (transaction code 29.1, the provision of customized and non-customized R&D services; and, transaction code 29.2, other R&D services, including testing) and to other selected services (transaction code 42).

(2) Questions on “Contract manufacturing services” will be eliminated. Details regarding the material inputs, as well as the output product of the contract manufacturing services activity, for both sales and purchases activities will no longer be collected.

BEA will also redesign the format and wording of the survey. The new survey design will incorporate improvements that have been made to other BEA surveys. BE-120 benchmark survey instructions and data item descriptions will be changed to improve clarity and ensure that the survey form is consistent with other BEA surveys.

BEA made a change to the proposed question on employment size class (addition 3 above) to adjust the check box ranges to enhance the usefulness of the data collected. The modifications from the initial proposal do not impact the reporter's burden associated with the question; reporters will still only be required to check a single box when responding.

Additionally, BEA made a minor modification to the originally proposed “exclusions” in defining which digitally delivered services are to be reported on Schedules D and E. The original text in the proposed rule indicated that services provided by manually-typed email, telephone, or fax would be excluded. In this final rule, BEA has removed these exclusions to better align BEA statistics with new developments in international guidelines. Specifically, subsequent to publication of the proposed rule, an expert group organized by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) adopted a final definition of digital trade for the forthcoming Handbook on Measuring Digital Trade that only excludes services provided via in-person meetings, or postal or private delivery.

This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

This final rule does not contain policies with federalism implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a Federalism assessment under Executive Order 13132.

The collection-of-information in this final rule was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520 (PRA). OMB approved the reinstatement, with change, of the information collection under OMB control number 0608-0058.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of 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 displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The BE-120 survey is expected to result in the filing of reports from approximately 15,000 respondents. Approximately 11,000 respondents will complete the survey, and approximately 4,000 will file exemption claims. The respondent burden for this collection of information will vary from one respondent to another, but is estimated to average (1) 24 hours for the 5,000 respondents that report data by transaction type, country, and affiliation; (2) 4 hours for the 6,000 respondents that report data by transaction type only; and (3) 1 hour for the 4,000 that file an exemption claim. These burden-hour estimates consider time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Thus, the total respondent burden for this survey is estimated at 148,000 hours, or approximately 10 hours per response (148,000 hours/15,000 respondents), compared to 145,000 hours, or about 9.5 hours per response (145,000 hours/15,500 respondents) for the 2017 BE-120 benchmark survey. The increase in burden hours is due to estimated changes in the expected quantity of survey responses, the composition of the respondent universe (those filing full schedule detail vs. totals by transaction type only) from 2017 to 2022, as well as modifications to the content of the survey for those filing schedule detail.

Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in the final rule should be sent to both BEA via email at christopher.stein@bea.gov, and OMB, OIRA, Paperwork Reduction Project 0608-0058, Attention PRA Desk Officer for BEA, via email at OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.

The Chief Counsel for Regulation, Department of Commerce, certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business Administration, at the proposed rule stage that this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. No comments were received on that certification or on the economic impacts of this rule more generally. Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been prepared.

For reasons set forth in the preamble, BEA amends 15 CFR part 801 as follows:

This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website: www.treas.gov/ofac.

OFAC issued GL 8 on February 24, 2022 to authorize certain transactions otherwise prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024. At the time of issuance, OFAC made GL 8 available on its website ( www.treas.gov/ofac ). Subsequently, OFAC issued further iterations of GL 8, all of which were available on OFAC's website. GL 8A, which also authorized certain transactions otherwise prohibited by E.O. 14024, was issued on February 28, 2022. GL 8B, which authorized certain transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), was issued on April 6, 2022. All three of these GLs had an expiration date of June 24, 2022. On June 14, 2022, OFAC issued GL 8C, which also authorizes certain transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR and has an expiration date of December 5, 2022. The text of GLs 8 through 8C is provided below.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 involving one or more of the following entities that are related to energy are authorized, through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, June 24, 2022:

(1) State Corporation Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs Vnesheconombank;

(2) Public Joint Stock Company Bank Financial Corporation Otkritie;

(3) Sovcombank Open Joint Stock Company;

(4) Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank of Russia;

(5) VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company; or

(6) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(b) For the purposes of this general license, the term “related to energy” means the extraction, production, refinement, liquefaction, gasification, regasification, conversion, enrichment, fabrication, transport, or purchase of petroleum, including crude oil, lease condensates, unfinished oils, natural gas liquids, petroleum products, natural gas, or other products capable of producing energy, such as coal, wood, or agricultural products used to manufacture biofuels, or uranium in any form, as well as the development, production, generation, transmission, or exchange of power, through any means, including nuclear, thermal, and renewable energy sources.

(c) This general license does not authorize:

(1) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity subject to Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions; or

(2) Any transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to E.O. 14024 other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 involving one or more of the following entities that are related to energy are authorized, through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, June 24, 2022:

(1) State Corporation Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs Vnesheconombank;

(2) Public Joint Stock Company Bank Financial Corporation Otkritie;

(3) Sovcombank Open Joint Stock Company;

(4) Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank of Russia;

(5) VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company;

(6) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest; or

(7) the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

(b) For the purposes of this general license, the term “related to energy” means the extraction, production, refinement, liquefaction, gasification, regasification, conversion, enrichment, fabrication, transport, or purchase of petroleum, including crude oil, lease condensates, unfinished oils, natural gas liquids, petroleum products, natural gas, or other products capable of producing energy, such as coal, wood, or agricultural products used to manufacture biofuels, or uranium in any form, as well as the development, production, generation, transmission, or exchange of power, through any means, including nuclear, thermal, and renewable energy sources.

(c) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 1A under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Certain Sovereign Debt of the Russian Federation;

(2) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity subject to Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(3) Any debit to an account on the books of a U.S. financial institution of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; or

(4) Any transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to E.O. 14024 other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(d) Effective February 28, 2022, General License No. 8, dated February 24, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 8A.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 involving one or more of the following entities that are related to energy are authorized, through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, June 24, 2022:

(1) State Corporation Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs Vnesheconombank;

(2) Public Joint Stock Company Bank Financial Corporation Otkritie;

(3) Sovcombank Open Joint Stock Company;

(4) Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank of Russia;

(5) VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company;

(6) Joint Stock Company Alfa-Bank;

(7) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest; or

(8) the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

(b) For the purposes of this general license, the term “related to energy” means the extraction, production, refinement, liquefaction, gasification, regasification, conversion, enrichment, fabrication, transport, or purchase of petroleum, including crude oil, lease condensates, unfinished oils, natural gas liquids, petroleum products, natural gas, or other products capable of producing energy, such as coal, wood, or agricultural products used to manufacture biofuels, or uranium in any form, as well as the development, production, generation, transmission, or exchange of power, through any means, including nuclear, thermal, and renewable energy sources.

(c) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 1A under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Certain Sovereign Debt of the Russian Federation ;

(2) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity subject to Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions ;

(3) Any debit to an account on the books of a U.S. financial institution of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; or

(4) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russia Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(d) Effective April 6, 2022, General License No. 8A, dated February 28, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 8B.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 involving one or more of the following entities that are related to energy are authorized, through 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time, December 5, 2022:

(1) State Corporation Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs Vnesheconombank;

(2) Public Joint Stock Company Bank Financial Corporation Otkritie;

(3) Sovcombank Open Joint Stock Company;

(4) Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank of Russia;

(5) VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company;

(6) Joint Stock Company Alfa-Bank;

(7) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest; or

(8) the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

(b) For the purposes of this general license, the term “related to energy” means the extraction, production, refinement, liquefaction, gasification, regasification, conversion, enrichment, fabrication, transport, or purchase of petroleum, including crude oil, lease condensates, unfinished oils, natural gas liquids, petroleum products, natural gas, or other products capable of producing energy, such as coal, wood, or agricultural products used to manufacture biofuels, or uranium in any form, as well as the development, production, generation, transmission, or exchange of power, through any means, including nuclear, thermal, and renewable energy sources.

(c) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 1A under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Certain Sovereign Debt of the Russian Federation ;

(2) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity subject to Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions ;

(3) Any debit to an account on the books of a U.S. financial institution of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; or

(4) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russia Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(d) Effective June 14, 2022, General License No. 8B, dated April 6, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 8C.

This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website: www.treas.gov/ofac .

On August 2, 2022, OFAC issued GLs 40A, 47, and 48 to authorize certain transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587. On August 3, 2022, OFAC issued GLs 40B, 47A, and 48A to clarify that the licenses apply to Joint Stock Company State Transportation Leasing Company.

GL 40B replaced and superseded GL 40A and contains no expiration date. GL 47A replaced and superseded GL 47 and expires at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, September 1, 2022. GL 48A replaced and superseded GL 48 and contains two expiration dates: (i) 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022, for the authorization in paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) of GL 48A, and (ii) 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 31, 2022, for the authorization in paragraph (a)(2) of GL 48. At the time of issuance, GLs 40B, 47A, and 48A were each made available on OFAC's website ( www.treas.gov/ofac ). The text of these GLs is provided below.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), all transactions ordinarily incident and necessary to the provision, exportation, or reexportation of goods, technology, or services to ensure the safety of civil aviation involving one or more of the blocked entities listed in the Annex to this general license and that are prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 are authorized, provided that:

(1) The aircraft is registered in a jurisdiction solely outside of the Russian Federation; and

(2) The goods, technology, or services that are provided, exported, or reexported are for use on aircraft operated solely for civil aviation purposes.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked entities listed in the Annex to this general license, unless separately authorized.

(c) Effective August 3, 2022, General License No. 40A, dated August 2, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 40B.

List of blocked entities described in paragraph (a) of General License 40B:

(a) Public Joint Stock Company United Aircraft Corporation;

(b) Irkut Corporation Joint Stock Company;

(c) Energotsentr Irkut;

(d) Irkut-Avtotrans;

(e) Irkut-Remstroi;

(f) Irkut-Stanko Service;

(g) Rapart Servisez;

(h) Sportivno-Ozdorovitelnyi Tsentr Irkut-Zenit;

(i) Tipografiya Irkut;

(j) Joint Stock Company Ilyushin Finance Company;

(k) Open Joint Stock Company Ilyushin Aviation Complex;

(l) Public Joint Stock Company Taganrog Aviation Scientific-Technical Complex N.A. G.M. Beriev;

(m) Joint Stock Company Flight Research Institute N.A. M.M. Gromov;

(n) Tupolev Public Joint Stock Company;

(o) Limited Liability Company Kapo-Avtotrans;

(p) Limited Liability Company Kapo-Zhilbitservis;

(q) Limited Liability Company Networking Company Irkut;

(r) Joint Stock Company State Transportation Leasing Company; or

(s) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this general license, all transactions ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down of any transaction involving one or more of the following blocked persons that are prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, September 1, 2022, provided that any payment to a blocked person must be made into a blocked account in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR):

(1) Skolkovo Foundation;

(2) Skolkovo Institute of Technology;

(3) Technopark Skolkovo Limited Liability Company;

(4) Federal State Institution of Higher Vocational Education Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology;

(5) Publichnoe Aktsionernoe Obschestvo Magnitogorskiy Metallurgicheskiy Kombinat;

(6) Joint Stock Company State Transportation Leasing Company; or

(7) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR, including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(c) Effective August 3, 2022, General License No. 47, dated August 2, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 47A.

(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer, or facilitation of the divestment or transfer, of debt or equity of one or more of the following entities purchased prior to August 2, 2022 (“covered debt or equity”) to a non-U.S. person are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022:

(i) Publichnoe Aktsionernoe Obschestvo Magnitogorskiy Metallurgicheskiy Kombinat;

(ii) Joint Stock Company State Transportation Leasing Company; or

(iii) Any entity in which one or more of the above entities own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by E.O. 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to facilitating, clearing, and settling trades of covered debt or equity are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 31, 2022, provided that such trades were placed prior to 4:00 p.m. eastern daylight time, August 2, 2022.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by E.O. 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down of derivative contracts entered into prior to August 2, 2022, that (i) include a blocked person described in paragraph (a) of this general license as a counterparty or (ii) are linked to covered debt or equity are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022, provided that any payments to a blocked person are made into a blocked account in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR).

(c) Paragraph (a) of this general license does not authorize:

(1) U.S. persons to sell, or to facilitate the sale of, covered debt or equity to, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked; or

(2) U.S. persons to purchase or invest in, or to facilitate the purchase of or investment in, directly or indirectly, covered debt or equity, other than purchases of, or investments in, covered debt or equity that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer of covered debt or equity, as described in paragraph (a) of this general license.

(d) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR, including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(e) Effective August 3, 2022, General License No. 48, dated August 2, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 48A.

This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website: www.treas.gov/ofac.

OFAC issued GLs 40 and 43 on June 28, 2022. GL 40 contained no expiration date but was replaced and superseded by GL 40A on August 2, 2022. GL 43 had an expiration date of 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, August 31, 2022, but was replaced and superseded by GL 43A on August 2, 2022. GL 43A expires at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, August 31, 2022. On August 2, 2022, OFAC also issued GLs 47, 48, and 49. GL 47 expires at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, September 1, 2022. GL 48 contains two expiration dates: (i) 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022, for the authorization in paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) of GL 48, and (ii) 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 31, 2022, for the authorization in paragraph (a)(2) of GL 48. GL 49 expires at 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time, January 31, 2023. GLs 40A, 43A, 47, 48, and 49 each authorize certain transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587, and at the time of issuance, each was made available on OFAC's website ( www.treas.gov/ofac ). The text of these GLs is provided below.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), all transactions ordinarily incident and necessary to the provision, exportation, or reexportation of goods, technology, or services to ensure the safety of civil aviation involving one or more of the blocked entities listed in the Annex to this general license and that are prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 are authorized, provided that:

(1) The aircraft is registered in a jurisdiction solely outside of the Russian Federation; and

(2) The goods, technology, or services that are provided, exported, or reexported are for use on aircraft operated solely for civil aviation purposes.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked entities listed in the Annex to this general license, unless separately authorized.

(c) Effective August 2, 2022, General License No. 40, dated June 28, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 40A.

List of blocked entities described in paragraph (a) of General License 40A:

(a) Public Joint Stock Company United Aircraft Corporation;

(b) Irkut Corporation Joint Stock Company;

(c) Energotsentr Irkut;

(d) Irkut-Avtotrans;

(e) Irkut-Remstroi;

(f) Irkut-Stanko Service;

(g) Rapart Servisez;

(h) Sportivno-Ozdorovitelnyi Tsentr Irkut-Zenit;

(i) Tipografiya Irkut;

(j) Joint Stock Company Ilyushin Finance Company;

(k) Open Joint Stock Company Ilyushin Aviation Complex;

(l) Public Joint Stock Company Taganrog Aviation Scientific-Technical Complex N.A. G.M. Beriev;

(m) Joint Stock Company Flight Research Institute N.A. M.M. Gromov;

(n) Tupolev Public Joint Stock Company;

(o) Limited Liability Company Kapo-Avtotrans;

(p) Limited Liability Company Kapo-Zhilbitservis;

(q) Limited Liability Company Networking Company Irkut;

(r) Joint Stock Company Government Transport Company; or

(s) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer, or facilitation of the divestment or transfer, of debt or equity of Public Joint Stock Company Severstal (“Severstal”) or Nord Gold PLC (“Nord Gold”), or any entity in which Severstal or Nord Gold owns, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest, purchased prior to June 2, 2022 (“covered debt or equity”) to a non-U.S. person are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, August 31, 2022.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by E.O. 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down of derivative contracts entered into prior to June 2, 2022 that (i) include a blocked person described in paragraph (a) of this general license as a counterparty or (ii) are linked to covered debt or equity are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, August 31, 2022, provided that any payments to a blocked person are made into a blocked account in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR).

(c) U.S. financial institutions are authorized to unblock covered debt or equity that was blocked on or after June 2, 2022 but before June 28, 2022, provided that the unblocked covered debt or equity is solely used to effect transactions authorized in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this general license.

Note to paragraph (c). U.S. financial institutions unblocking property pursuant to paragraph (c) of this general license are required to file an unblocking report pursuant to 31 CFR 501.603.

(d) Paragraph (a) of this general license does not authorize:

(1) U.S. persons to sell, or to facilitate the sale of, covered debt or equity to, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked; or

(2) U.S. persons to purchase or invest in, or to facilitate the purchase of or investment in, directly or indirectly, covered debt or equity, other than purchases of or investments in covered debt or equity that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer of covered debt or equity, as described in paragraph (a) of this general license.

(e) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR, including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(f) Effective August 2, 2022, General License No. 43, dated June 28, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 43A.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this general license, all transactions ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down of any transaction involving one or more of the following blocked persons that are prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, September 1, 2022, provided that any payment to a blocked person must be made into a blocked account in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR):

(1) Skolkovo Foundation;

(2) Skolkovo Institute of Technology;

(3) Technopark Skolkovo Limited Liability Company;

(4) Federal State Institution of Higher Vocational Education Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology;

(5) Publichnoe Aktsionernoe Obschestvo Magnitogorskiy Metallurgicheskiy Kombinat;

(6) Joint Stock Company Government Transport Company; or

(7) Any entity in which one or more of the above persons own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR, including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer, or facilitation of the divestment or transfer, of debt or equity of one or more of the following entities purchased prior to August 2, 2022 (“covered debt or equity”) to a non-U.S. person are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022:

(i) Publichnoe Aktsionernoe Obschestvo Magnitogorskiy Metallurgicheskiy Kombinat;

(ii) Joint Stock Company Government Transport Company; or

(iii) Any entity in which one or more of the above entities own, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, a 50 percent or greater interest.

(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by E.O. 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to facilitating, clearing, and settling trades of covered debt or equity are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 31, 2022, provided that such trades were placed prior to 4:00 p.m. eastern daylight time, August 2, 2022.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by E.O. 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down of derivative contracts entered into prior to August 2, 2022, that (i) include a blocked person described in paragraph (a) of this general license as a counterparty or (ii) are linked to covered debt or equity are authorized through 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time, October 3, 2022, provided that any payments to a blocked person are made into a blocked account in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR).

(c) Paragraph (a) of this general license does not authorize:

(1) U.S. persons to sell, or to facilitate the sale of, covered debt or equity to, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked; or

(2) U.S. persons to purchase or invest in, or to facilitate the purchase of or investment in, directly or indirectly, covered debt or equity, other than purchases of, or investments in, covered debt or equity that are ordinarily incident and necessary to the divestment or transfer of covered debt or equity, as described in paragraph (a) of this general license.

(d) This general license does not authorize:

(1) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the RuHSR, including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website: www.treas.gov/ofac.

On August 19, 2022, OFAC issued GLs 38A and 50 to authorize certain transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587.

GL 38A replaced and superseded GL 38 and contains no expiration date. GL 50 contains no expiration date. At the time of issuance, GLs 38A and 50 were each made available on OFAC's website ( www.treas.gov/ofac ). The text of these GLs is provided below.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this general license, all transactions ordinarily incident and necessary to the processing of pension payments to (1) U.S. persons or (2) non-U.S. persons not located in the Russian Federation, that are prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 are authorized, provided that the only involvement of blocked persons is the processing of funds by financial institutions blocked pursuant to E.O. 14024.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity determined to be subject to the prohibitions of Directive 2, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions ;

(2) Any debit to an account on the books of a U.S. financial institution of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, or the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

(c) Effective August 19, 2022, General License No. 38, dated June 2, 2022, is replaced and superseded in its entirety by this General License No. 38A.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this general license, all transactions prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 that are ordinarily incident and necessary to (i) the closing of an account of an individual, wherever located, who is not a blocked person (“the account holder”), held at a financial institution blocked pursuant to E.O. 14024, and (ii) the unblocking and lump sum transfer of all remaining funds and other assets in the account to the account holder, including to an account of the account holder held at a non-blocked financial institution, are authorized.

(b) This general license does not authorize:

(1) The opening or maintaining of a correspondent account or payable-through account for or on behalf of any entity subject to Directive 2 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Correspondent or Payable-Through Accounts and Processing of Transactions Involving Certain Foreign Financial Institutions;

(2) Any transactions prohibited by Directive 4 under E.O. 14024, Prohibitions Related to Transactions Involving the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation ; or

(3) Any transactions otherwise prohibited by the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 587 (RuHSR), including transactions involving any person blocked pursuant to the RuHSR other than the blocked persons described in paragraph (a) of this general license, unless separately authorized.

Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” means the EPA.

The factual and legal background for this action is discussed in detail in our June 30, 2022, proposed approval (see 87 FR 39036). In that document we proposed to approve various revisions to the Utah SIP that were submitted to the EPA on May 21, 2020, May 28, 2020, November 3, 2020, and November 12, 2020. The proposal provides a detailed description of the revisions and the rationale for the EPA's proposed actions.

The revisions to the Utah Administrative Code address various State Implementation Plan (SIP) changes and updates. Specifically, we are approving clerical updates to the General Requirements, Permits, and Emissions Inventory rules, including updating the effective date of various code of federal regulations (CFR) referenced. Additionally, we are approving changes to several Permits rules including adding new definitions, clarifying testing methods, and specifying an emissions limit for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ) for emissions impact analysis. We are also approving the repeal and replacement of the Emissions Testing rule as well as approve a new rule related to abrasive blasting in particular matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 microns (PM 10 ) nonattainment areas.

We received one anonymous comment on this proposal which expressed general opposition to activities in the state that emit pollution, such as land ports, railroads, fracking, abandoned wells, and development of the Salt Lake City Valley. The commentor expressed support for “higher standards,” but did not provide any specific comments related to the proposed approval. After reviewing the comment, EPA has determined that it is outside the scope of this action and therefore, the EPA is not altering its proposed rulemaking.

We are approving submitted revisions to R307-101. General Requirements., R307-150. Emission Inventories., R307-165. Stack Testing., R307-306. PM 10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas: Abrasive Blasting., R307-401. Permit: New and Modified Sources., R307-405. Permits: Major Sources in Attainment or Unclassified Areas (PSD)., and R307-410. Permits: Emissions Impact Analysis. from the State's May 21, 2020, May 28, 2020, November 3, 2020, and November 12, 2020, submittals as shown in Table 1. We are not acting on several submittals that were withdrawn by the State on June 13, 2022. 1

In this document, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Rule R307-101, R307-150, R307-165, R307-306, R307-401, R307-405, and R307-410 discussed in section I of this preamble and listed in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the state implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation. 2

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 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:

• 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);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• 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 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• 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

• 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).

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, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., 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 Federal Register . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

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 November 7, 2022. 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 (see section 307(b)(2)).

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

This document announces that, on July 25, 2022, OMB approved, for a period of three years, the information collection requirements relating to the White Space Database rules contained in the Commission's Amendment of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules for Unlicensed White Space Device Operations in the Television Bands, Report and Order, FCC 20-156 (86 FR 2278, January 12, 2021). The OMB Control Number is 3060-1155. The Commission publishes this document as an announcement of the effective date of the information collection requirements provided at instruction 4.f. for § 15.709(g)(1)(ii).

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), the FCC is notifying the public that it received final OMB approval on July 25, 2022, for the information collection requirements contained in the Commission's rules in 47 CFR part 15.

Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current, valid OMB Control Number.

No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a current, valid OMB Control Number.

The OMB Control Number is 3060-1155.

The foregoing notice is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, October 1, 1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507.

The total annual reporting burdens and costs for the respondents are as follows:

OMB Control Number: 3060-1155.

OMB Approval Date: July 25, 2022.

OMB Expiration Date: July 31, 2025.

Title: Sections 15.709, 15.713, 15.714, 15.715 and 15.717, 27.1320, TV White Space Broadcast Bands.

Form Number: N/A.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,510 respondents; 3,500 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 2-5 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion; recordkeeping and third-party disclosure requirements.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 201, 302a, and 303.

Total Annual Burden: 7,000 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $151,000.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: No information is requested that would require assurance of confidentiality.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Needs and Uses: On October 28, 2020, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) released a Report and Order, 86 FR 2278, January 21, 2021, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 86 FR 11490, February 25, 2021, Unlicensed White Space Device Operations in the Television Bands, ET Docket No. 20-36, FCC 20-156. The Commission increased the antenna height above average terrain (HAAT) limit from 250 meters to 500 meters for fixed white space devices operating in “less congested” areas, which are defined as those areas where at least half the TV channels in a device's band of operation are vacant. Parties planning to operate devices with an HAAT that exceeds 250 meters must notify all potentially affected TV stations at least four days before commencing operation in accordance with the procedure set forth in § 15.709(g)(1)(ii). The Commission adopted this procedure because white space devices operating at high HAAT have the potential to interfere with TV reception at large distances.

FMCSA is correcting the final rule on UCR fees that published September 1, 2022 at 87 FR 53680. This rule amended the regulations for the annual registration fees States collect from motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight forwarders, and leasing companies for the Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Plan and Agreement for the 2023 registration year and subsequent registration years. An inadvertent typographical error created an incorrect authority citation. This document corrects this error.

Accordingly, FMCSA corrects 49 CFR part 367 by making the following correcting amendment:

The insurance standard established in this final rule provides a nationally consistent suite of insurance coverages that an observer provider seeking authorization, or that has been authorized, must have to mitigate the financial risks associated with providing observer services; specifically observer deployments to fishing vessels or shoreside locations such as processing facilities, and those that arise with training personnel for these deployments. Through compliance with this minimum standard, observer providers would be properly insured, thereby mitigating the financial risks that fishing vessels, first receivers, and shoreside processors have when complying with observer coverage requirements.

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., establishes a national program for conservation and management of fishery resources within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). See id. 1801(a)(6), 1811(a). NMFS, acting under authority delegated from the Secretary of Commerce, is responsible for managing fisheries under the MSA, in conjunction with eight regional fishery management councils (Councils) established under the Act. See id. 1852(a). Each Council has authority to develop fishery management plans (FMPs) for fisheries in a specific geographical area and to deem proposed regulations that are necessary for plan implementation. See id. 1852(a), (c).

Collection of information on fishing and fish processing, such as type and quantity of fishing gear used, catch in numbers of fish or weight thereof, fishing locations, and biological information, are critical to effective fishery management. See id. 1853(a)(5). To obtain this information, the MSA authorizes, among other things, that an FMP may “[r]equire that one or more observers be carried on board a vessel of the United States engaged in fishing for species that are subject to the plan, for the purpose of collecting data necessary for the conservation and management of the fishery . . .”. See id. 1853(b)(8). The MSA defines the term “observer” as “any person required or authorized to be carried on a vessel for conservation and management purposes by regulations or permits under this Act.” See id. 1802(31). This definition would thus cover persons referred to in FMPs and regulations as “observers” as well as “catch-monitors” or “at-sea monitors.” In this final rule, the term “observer” refers to a person who is deployed as an observer, a catch or at-sea monitor on a fishing vessel or mothership, or as an observer deployed to a shoreside first receiver location or processing facility. Also, in the preamble of this final rule, NMFS refers to a company that provides observer or catch monitor or at-sea monitor services as an “observer provider.”

At present, all at-sea and shoreside observer deployments for NMFS observer programs are staffed by observer providers. These companies provide observer staffing support under two distinct models: (1) direct service, where the NMFS observer program contracts with an observer provider and oversees the provider's services based on the terms of the contract; and (2) industry-funded service, where the observer provider provides services directly to a vessel or a fleet of vessels, and a NMFS regional observer program oversees the provision of those services based on requirements set forth in NMFS regulations.

In the North Pacific and most West Coast programs, an observer provider must be permitted under the programs' regulations and satisfy other responsibilities specified in regulations in order to provide services in either the direct contract model or industry-funded model. The North Pacific and West Coast programs have regulatory-based insurance requirements for observer providers that are permitted to deploy observers. Permitted observer providers must demonstrate compliance with these requirements on an annual basis by providing the relevant program copies of certificates of insurance that name the applicable program as the certificate holder and that verify that the company has the insurance specified in the applicable regulation.

In the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic region an observer provider must be approved to provide services in the at-sea sampler/observer coverage program or at-sea monitoring services in the Northeast Multispecies sector program. The Northeast at-sea sampler/observer coverage program insurance requirements are included as elements of an approved program provider application. In other words, an observer provider must demonstrate evidence that it holds the insurance specified in the regulation as part of its application to become an approved provider. Likewise, as part of an application to be an approved services provider in the Northeast Multispecies sector at-sea monitoring program, a company must demonstrate that it holds insurance that NMFS deems adequate.

The Southeast, Southwest, and Pacific Islands programs use only the direct contract model, and do not have regulations to authorize a company to deploy observers in their programs through an approval or permit process. Nor do these programs have regulations that specify observer provider responsibilities. Further information about NMFS' regional observer programs is available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/fishery-observers.

In 2014, NMFS initiated an evaluation of observer provider insurance requirements in North Pacific observer program regulations. This effort was prompted by a letter from Alaskan Observers Inc. (AOI) to the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) which asserted that some North Pacific insurance requirements are excessive or inapplicable to observer provider operations. AOI also asserted that there are inconsistent insurance requirements among regional observer programs. In a 2015 letter to the NPFMC Executive Director, NMFS agreed with AOI's views that certain insurance requirements are necessary and noted that NPFMC could consider revising those North Pacific observer program regulations to specify different types of insurance. NMFS then initiated a broader, national evaluation of observer provider insurance regulation to address concerns with the North Pacific Observer program requirements that are reflected in other program regulations and to address the lack of consistency between regional requirements. Through this evaluation, NMFS obtained extensive input from observer providers, insurance experts, and other interested parties, on the different types of insurance and associated coverage amounts that are needed to address the financial risks that observer deployments present in any federally managed fishery that is subject to observer coverage. Based on this effort, and internal research and analysis, NMFS published a proposed rule to establish a uniform, nationally consistent minimum insurance standard that would apply in regional regulatory programs that authorize an observer provider to deploy a person in any mandatory or voluntary observer program and that specify responsibilities of authorized providers (86 FR 66259; November 22, 2021). NMFS concluded that establishment of a minimum insurance standard for observer providers is necessary to clarify the types of insurance that are appropriate to mitigation the financial risks associated with provided observers services; specifically observer deployments to fishing vessels or shoreside locations such as processing facilitates, and those that arise with training personnel for these deployments. Further background on NMFS' development of, and rationale for specific elements of the national minimum insurance standard is available in the proposed rule.

NMFS received comments on the proposed rule in three letters received from the Purse Seine Vessel Owners' Association (PSVOA), Gallagher Insurance (Gallagher), and LIG Marine Managers. Summaries of the comments and agency responses are provided below.

Comment 1. Gallagher commented on NMFS' citation to a 2017 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries report that ranked commercial fishing as one of the most dangerous occupations and NMFS' suggestion that, because observers are usually deployed to commercial fishing vessels, observers' risk of occupational injury is equal to that of commercial fishermen. Gallagher noted that an occupation with a high Fatal Occupational Injuries ranking does necessarily mean that it has a high level of Occupation Injury overall. Certain characteristics of commercial fishing—a relatively low number of employees compared to other food processing industries and a unique at-sea work environment—lead it to having a higher level of per-employee fatalities, but not necessarily a higher level of overall occupational injuries compared to other industries. Lastly, for observers, several factors mitigate the risk of occupational injury that is otherwise faced by commercial fishermen, including: work stations designated for observers; different proximity to mechanical equipment, and deployment to processing vessels or motherships or shoreside facilities which have less or no risk of sinking.

Response. NMFS agrees that a high Fatal Occupational Injuries ranking does not necessarily mean a high level of Occupation Injury overall for commercial fishing. NMFS also agrees that the risk of observer occupational injury may not always be equivalent to such risks for commercial fishermen. However, NMFS maintains its view that occupational injury risks faced by commercial fishermen are relevant to assessing, as a general matter, the risks for observers and the minimum level of insurance observer providers should have to insure against those risks.

Comment 2. In response to NMFS' specific request for comments on the issue, PSVOA expressed strong support for enhancing the proposed Marine General Liability (MGL) policy requirement with an endorsement that extends protection to vessel or shoreside processor owners from legal actions filed by an observer. Such an endorsement should be added, because vessel owners face significant exposure to liability from incidents that arise involving compliance with federal observer coverage requirements. The endorsement should name a vessel owner as a party that will be indemnified against a lawsuit or other legal action that seeks redress of an observer injury or death.

Response. NMFS recognizes PSVOA's concern that vessel owners have some risk of legal actions filed against them by observers, whether specifically or as part of an action brought against the employer. However, NMFS has decided not to add an endorsement to the MGL policy requirement in the rule. The proposed rule noted that the incidence or risk of observer-initiated legal actions against parties other than their employer are likely to be low, and NMFS did not receive public comments that would affect that conclusion. Such risks should be addressed through the Marine Employer's Liability (MEL) policy element of the minimum insurance standard. In addition, the minimum insurance standard is intended to protect vessel and shoreside processor owners against employer-based claims. Based on available information about risks and costs, NMFS believes that requiring observer providers to have an enhanced MGL policy that protects vessel and shoreside processor owners against any legal action brought by an observer, not just those that are employer-based, is too broad and overly burdensome. For that same reason, NMFS also declines PSVOA's request that the minimum insurance standard be modified to require that the MGL have an endorsement that names a vessel or shoreside processor as a party that that will be indemnified against a lawsuit or other legal action that seeks redress of an observer injury or death.

Comment 3. Gallagher and LIG Marine Managers commented that the preamble of the proposed rule incorrectly suggested that there is a distinction between a MEL policy and a policy for maritime liability to cover claims under the Jones Act and General Maritime Law (GML). There is no difference between the two policies because MEL is a policy for maritime liability that covers claims under the Jones Act and GML.

Response. NMFS agrees that an MEL policy covers claims under the Jones Act and GML. In the preamble to the proposed rule, NMFS used the same terminology reflected in existing regional observer program regulations. North Pacific and West Coast program regulations require coverage for maritime liability to cover Jones Act and GML claims while the Northeast program regulations require the same coverage but describe it as an MEL policy. This rule includes an MEL policy and, as NMFS explained in the proposed rule, the purpose of that policy is to provide coverage for Jones Act and GML claims.

Comment 4. Gallagher commented extensively on the applicability of the U.S. Longshore and Harborworkers Compensation Act (LHWCA), the Jones Act, and GML to observers and expressed support for requiring observer providers to have insurance for observer claims for benefits under these authorities. Gallagher asserted that if LHWCA applies to observers on land, it must also be applicable to observers while deployed on a vessel in US navigable waterways. Gallagher referenced analysis by insurance expert Vincent Gullette, of American Equity Underwriters, that is documented in NMFS' Fisheries Observers Insurance, Liability and Labor Workshop Technical Memorandum, dated June 12-14, 2001, available at Observer Insurance Tech Memo.

According to Mr. Gullette, observers may not be covered under the LHWCA because they do not meet the criteria for longshore status. Observers may be considered “aquaculture workers” for purposes of the LHWCA, and, as such, would be excluded from coverage under that authority. But if not considered “aquaculture workers,” they would be covered under the LHWCA whether on land or at-sea. Gallagher expressed support for the finding of that insurance expert and NMFS' finding that, because observers are not vessel crew, neither the Jones Act nor GML apply to them. Notwithstanding, Gallagher expressed support for inclusion of LHWCA coverage and MEL coverage for Jones Act and GML claims in the rule. While observers may not have the requisite status needed to recover benefits under these authorities, observers are nonetheless free to pursue such benefits and that could result in significant legal costs for observer providers.

Response. NMFS agrees that the details of whether and how the LHWCA, Jones Act, and GML apply to observers are unclear in some cases. Regardless of these uncertainties, NMFS agrees that a minimum suite of insurance for observer provider operations must include coverage for claims under those authorities, and thus made no change to the final rule as a result of this comment. NMFS notes that the minimum insurance standard is designed to be narrowly tailored to cover the reasonable risks, but not every possible risk, that may arise with observer provider operations. As explained in the proposed rule, based on independent research and extensive outreach efforts to insurance experts, observer providers, and other government agencies, NMFS determined that the LHWCA applies only to shoreside incidents. While deployed on a vessel under the MSA or the Marine Mammal Protection Act, observers have status as Federal employees for purposes of compensation under the Federal Employee Compensation Act. See 16 U.S.C. 1881b(c). Accordingly, because observers can seek FECA benefits for injuries sustained while deployed on a vessel, NMFS concluded that, for purposes of the minimum insurance standard, observer providers need only obtain LHWCA coverage for observers when they perform duties shoreside. Nonetheless, the minimum insurance standard establishes a floor, not a ceiling, for the appropriate insurance policy types and levels of associated insurance policy coverage amounts. Thus, this rule would not prevent an observer provider from having broader insurance or higher coverage amounts than what is required under the minimum standard.

NMFS agrees that observers do not have the requisite status for Jones Act and GML claims, but also agrees that the minimum standard should include an MEL policy to address legal costs should observers pursue Jones Act or GML claims. Moreover, as NMFS explained in the proposed rule, an MEL policy is appropriate to cover certain GML benefits that do apply to incidents at-sea involving observers, specifically potential remedies related to claims based on Unseaworthiness, Wrongful Death, Transportation, Wages, Maintenance and Cure, and the Death on the High Seas Act.

Comment 5. LIG Marine Managers commented as follows on LHWCA and State Workers' Compensation policies. LHWCA and State Workers' Compensation policies are always issued to provide statutory coverage, thus it is not necessary to specify “at statutory limits” in the rule. The requirement for State Workers' Compensation should be changed to apply for “all states of operation” because some observer programs involve multiple states. LHWCA and State Workers' Compensation policies include a sublimit for employers' liability (EL) and that sublimit should be increased to $1 million. LIG Marine Managers illustrated these comments, and those in comment 6, in Table 1 below.

Response. NMFS agrees that LHWCA and State Workers' Compensation policies issued by insurance carriers provide statutory coverage. No change is needed in the rule, as reference to “at statutory limits” was not in the proposed regulatory text, only in the preamble. NMFS does not agree that the requirement for State Workers' Compensation should be revised to require coverage in “all states of operation”. As explained in the proposed rule, the minimum insurance standard applies only when NMFS regulations require observer provider companies to obtain approval or a permit to deploy a person in any mandatory or voluntary observer program. The North Pacific, West Coast, and Northeast observer programs have such regulatory requirements, whereas the Southeast, Southwest and Pacific Islands programs do not, as they currently operate only under a direct contract model. Requiring that State Workers' Compensation (or other policies) cover “all states of operation” would be overly broad for the former programs, which are subject to approval or permitting under regulations for particular fisheries and not for all states where they might operate. While direct contract programs are not subject to this rule, as explained in the proposed rule, NMFS will apply the minimum insurance standard in this rule as a condition of direct contracts for observer provider services by adding that standard to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Acquisitions and Grants Office Policy Manual. NMFS contracts with observer providers for services in specific fisheries, and thus, as with the regulations-based programs, believes requiring coverage in “all states of operation” would be overly broad.

Comment 6. LIG Marine Managers commented that commercial general liability coverage, which generally does not apply to any vessel-based operations, should be a component of MGL with a minimum of $1 million. Policy coverage amounts for MEL, EL, and MGL can be identified at common market limits, e.g., $1 million for each respective policy, but some insurance carriers prefer to write them differently. It does not matter how these coverage amounts are set out in any combination of primary and excess layers as long the total coverage is equal to or greater than the total of the coverage amounts required for each policy. LIG Marine Managers submitted Table 1 with its comments, which illustrates its recommendations summarized under Comments 5 and 6.

Response. NMFS agrees that some insurance carriers may craft policy coverage amounts differently than the market standard. Those variations do not weaken coverage so long as the total coverage of each policy is equal to or greater than the sum of what is required for each policy. Accordingly, this final rule amends the regulatory text of the proposed rule at 50 CFR 600.748 by adding a new paragraph (d) to include flexibility in satisfying the coverage amounts required for MGL and MEL policies.

With regard to the comment on an EL policy sublimit for LHWCA and State Workers' Compensation policies, NMFS believes that the standard limit for EL coverage is sufficient. Moreover, the purpose of this rule is to address the risks that observer provider operations present for fishing vessels and shoreside processors. An EL policy would do little to advance that purpose because it is intended to address the risks associated with lawsuits in which employees allege that their employers negligently created an unsafe work environment. Coverage that only addresses negligence claims by observers against observer providers—which to our knowledge are rare—would not mitigate the financial risks that observer deployments present for fishing vessels subject to observer coverage. NMFS reiterates that, as with all elements of the minimum standard in this rule, observer providers can choose to increase EL coverage as they deem necessary to address their operational needs.

As described above in the Responses to Public Comments section, in response to public comments and after further agency consideration, in this final rule NMFS has added a new paragraph (d) to section 600.748 to allow policy coverage amounts for Marine General Liability and Marine Employers' Liability under paragraph (b)(1) and (2) respectively to be higher or lower than the specified amounts so long as the total is equal to or greater than the combined specified amounts ( i.e., so long as the combined coverage for these policies is $2 million). Paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) were revised to include cross-references to paragraph (d).

In addition, NMFS has clarified the preface of paragraph 600.748(c) by replacing the phrase “policy coverages” with the phrase “scope of coverages,” which is a more accurate description of that paragraph.

NMFS issues this final rule pursuant to Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) section 305(d), which provides the Secretary of Commerce with general responsibility to carry out any FMP or FMP amendment, and to promulgate regulations as may be necessary to discharge such responsibility (16 U.S.C. 1855(d)). The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this final rule is consistent with the MSA and other applicable laws.

NOAA's Policy and Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Related Authorities (NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A and Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A) provide that all NOAA major Federal actions be reviewed with respect to environmental consequences on the human environment. Based on the NAO and Companion Manual, NMFS examined the proposed rule for its potential to impact the quality of the human environment and concluded that it would not have a significant adverse effect, individually or cumulatively, on the human environment and would not involve any extraordinary circumstances listed in the Companion Manual. NMFS has made the same conclusion for the final rule, and received no public comments related to effects on the human environment. Furthermore, NMFS determined that this final rule may appropriately be categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare either an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement in accordance with the categorical exclusion described at G7 in the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, Appendix, page E-14, which applies to preparation of policy directives, rules, regulations, and guidelines of an administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature, or for which the environmental effects are too broad, speculative or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis and will be subject later to the NEPA process, either collectively or on a case-by-case basis.

This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Regional regulatory programs that authorize an observer provider to deploy a person in any mandatory or voluntary observer program and that specify responsibilities of authorized providers already include insurance requirements. Thus, to operate in these programs, observer providers already must demonstrate that they have the insurance specified in the applicable regulations.

Due to the nuances of maritime law and the unique nature of observer deployments, regions have adopted differing insurance requirements that are in some cases overly burdensome and inefficient. This action would provide a national standard that clarifies the types and amounts of insurance and associated coverage amounts that best address the financial risks of observer provider operations regardless of the fishery or region in which an observer provider operates. In some cases, compliance with the final national insurance standard would require observer providers to have insurance that is different from what they are required to have under current regulations. While this final action could change the suite of insurance that observer providers are required to have, it does not make substantive increases to the insurance that is required in current regional programs.

For these reasons, we do not expect this action to result in a significant increase in the premiums that observer providers currently pay. In fact, the action could result in lower premiums due to the increased efficiency of having a national standard and the fact that the standard does not include certain coverages that are required under current regulations. Additionally, section 600.748(d) of the final rule has modified how the coverage amounts for MGL and MEL may be met, which provides greater flexibility to observer providers.

This action does not contain a change to a collection-of-information requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act. NMFS' regional observer program regulations that authorize observer providers or that specify authorized provider responsibilities already include procedures for demonstrating compliance with program insurance requirements, and this proposed rule would not change those procedures. The following existing collection of information requirements would continue to apply, under the following control numbers: (1) 0648-0318, Alaska Observer Program (applies to the North Pacific Observer Program); (2) 0648-0500, An Observer Program for At-Sea Processing Vessels in the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; and (3) 0648-0546, Northeast Region Observer Providers Requirements. Note that, while this action would make clear that the existing regulations for the West Coast Catcher Processor Program (50 CFR 660.160) include insurance requirements for permitted observer providers (by adding a reference to the minimum insurance standard to the program's regulations), the collection of an insurance certificate from observer providers that are permitted to operate in this program is already covered under the existing control number 0648-0500, An Observer Program for At-Sea Processing Vessels in the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery.

In compliance with section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NMFS prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA), which is included below.

In the Response to Comments section above, NMFS clarified that insurance policies for State Workers' Compensation and LHWCA are routinely issued “at statutory limits” and, therefore, that the level of coverage need not be specified in this final rule as it had been in the preamble to the proposed rule. NMFS also revised the regulatory text of the proposed rule at 50 CFR 600.748 by adding a new paragraph (d) to provide an observer provider with flexibility in satisfying required policy coverage amounts for Marine General Liability (MGL) and Marine Employers' Liability (MEL). Specifically, new paragraph (d) allows coverage amounts for those policies to be higher or lower than the specified amounts so long as the combined total coverage is equal to or greater than the required amounts for each respective policy. Neither the clarification to the coverage amount required for State Workers' Compensation and LHWCA, nor the addition of new paragraph (d) adding flexibility for satisfying the coverage amounts for MGL and MEL, have any cost implications.

No economic issues were raised by public comment, and, therefore, no changes to this final rule were made in response to public comments of an economic nature. NMFS received no comments on the initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), nor any comments from the Office of Advocacy for the Small Business Administration. NMFS does not have any new information to take into account for purposes of that analysis. For these reasons, the FRFA provided below, with the exception of non-substantive technical updates, reflects the initial regulatory flexibility analysis that NMFS prepared for the proposed rule.

The policy reasons for issuing this final rule are discussed in the preamble above and in the proposed rule and are not repeated here.

The objective of this final rule is to promote effective operation of regional observer programs by ensuring that observer providers have a nationally consistent suite of insurance coverages that properly addresses the financial risks of their operations, regardless of the fishery observed or the region in which the provider operates. The legal basis for this rule is 16 U.S.C. 1855(d). No other Federal rules duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.

Currently, there are six companies that provide observer services in a NMFS mandatory or voluntary observer program. These entities, which would be directly regulated by this rule include: A.I.S. Inc.; Alaskan Observers, Inc.; Saltwater, Inc.; TechSea International; Fathom Resources LLC; and East West Technical Services, LLC. Four of these entities operate in the North Pacific Observer Program. Three operate in the West Coast Observer Program, and two operate in the Northeast Observer Program. The specific NMFS regional observer programs in which these companies may be permitted or approved to deploy observers are as follows: the North Pacific Observer Program, 50 CFR 679.52; the West Coast Groundfish Observer Program, 50 CFR 660.16; the West Coast Catch Monitor Program, 50 CFR 660.17; the West Coast Groundfish Observer and Catch Monitor Provider Permits Program, 50 CFR 660.18; the West Coast Shoreside IFQ Program, 50 CFR 660.140; the West Coast Mothership Cooperative Program, 50 CFR 660.150; the West Coast Catcher Processor Cooperative Program, 50 CFR 660.160; the program for Northeast at-sea sampler/observer coverage, 50 CFR 648.11(h); and the Northeast Multispecies at-sea sector monitoring program, 50 CFR 648.87(b)(4). The information available to NMFS indicates that the principal activity of most of these companies is providing observers. All of the current observer provider companies are considered small entities under the RFA.

Additionally, firms interested in obtaining approval or a permit to provide observer services under a NMFS regional observer program in the future would be regulated under this rule. Observer provider services are specialized services, and NMFS does not know how many other firms might want to become providers in the future. In any event, NMFS anticipates that any new providers would be considered small entities. For purposes of the RFA, NMFS established a small business size standard (NAICS 11411) for all businesses in the commercial fishing industry including their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing. (See 80 FR 81194; 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411) is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all of its affiliated operations worldwide. Based on available information, NMFS has determined that all six of these companies are small entities, i.e., they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting (NAICS 114111), are independently owned or operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $11 million.

Even though this rule would apply to a substantial number of the relevant businesses, the implementation of this action would not result in a significant adverse economic impact on individual companies. As described below, this rule could result in possible changes in insurance costs for these companies, ranging from an increase of approximately $10,000 to an approximate decrease of a similar amount. This range includes potential benefits to the companies stemming from clarifying requirements and allowing them to drop certain insurance policies that NMFS has determined to be no longer necessary.

This final rule does not include new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. As noted under the Paperwork Reduction Act header above, NMFS' regional observer program regulations that authorize observer providers or that specify authorized provider responsibilities, already include procedures for demonstrating compliance with program insurance requirements, and this proposed rule would not change those procedures.

As required by 5 U.S.C. 604(a), NMFS' analysis considered whether there are any significant alternatives to the proposed rule that would accomplish its stated objectives while minimizing any significant economic impact on small entities. To identify alternatives, NMFS took several information gathering actions. In 2016, NMFS held an Observer Provider Insurance Workshop (2016 Workshop), which was attended by marine insurance experts, observer providers, observer representatives, and officials from relevant federal and state agencies. Additionally, in 2018, NMFS issued a Request for Information (2018 RFI) in which it asked for input on an appropriate suite of insurance and associated coverage amounts for observer providers (83 FR 32829, July 16, 2018). Through this engagement, NMFS identified no alternatives to the proposed rule that would reasonably address the unique risks that observer coverage presents for observer providers, observers, and the industry that is subject to observer coverage requirements. After considering public comment on the proposed rule, NMFS determined that there were no significant alternatives to the final rule. Therefore, in the proposed rule and this final rule, NMFS analyzed only whether this action would have a significant economic impact on observer providers, all of which are small entities.

Whether this final rule would have a significant economic impact depends upon whether carrying the required policies under the minimum national standard would result in increased premiums compared to the premiums that observer providers currently pay to comply with existing regional requirements. However, for both the proposed and final rules, NMFS lacked the precise baseline information on existing premium costs that is necessary to determine, with any specificity, the economic impact that may result from the rule. During development of the proposed rule, NMFS attempted to obtain baseline information on current observer provider insurance premium costs through outreach to the six companies that provide observer services in a NMFS mandatory or voluntary observer program. However, these companies viewed insurance cost information as proprietary, and, therefore, declined to provide details of their insurance costs or estimates of what premium costs would be to comply with the proposed national minimum standard. Nonetheless, based on the limited information that these companies did provide, NMFS estimated that current observer provider insurance premiums cost less than $5,000 per employee. It is possible that this action could result in a decrease of premiums from the estimated $5,000 per employee baseline, due to cost savings from lower premiums, from the consolidation of policies, or from the cancellation of policies that are no longer necessary. It is also possible for a premium increase to an outer bound of $10,000 per employee if a company previously had no policy coverage at all. Using these general assumptions, NMFS developed ranges in observer provider premium changes that could result from the proposed rule, if finalized and implemented (see table 3 below).

To form an accurate assessment of the economic impact that may result from the rule, in the proposed rule, NMFS specifically requested public comment on whether the magnitude of the ranges described below accurately captures the likely premium changes that may result from the rule and which of these ranges is most likely to apply upon implementation of this final rule.

NMFS received no comments on the premium ranges in the table, the table in general, or other aspects of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis. NMFS also did not receive comments on or related to baseline information on observer provider insurance premium costs, and thus the agency's estimates of such costs remains unchanged from the IRFA.

Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such publications as small entity compliance guides. As part of the rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a small entity compliance guide, which will be sent to all interested parties.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 600, 648, 660, and 679, are amended as follows:

Atlantic HMS fisheries, including BFT fisheries, are managed under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. ) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ). The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its amendments are implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27 divides the U.S. BFT quota recommended by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and as implemented by the United States among the various domestic fishing categories, per the allocations established in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments. NMFS is required under the Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest quotas under relevant international fishery agreements such as the ICCAT Convention, which is implemented domestically pursuant to ATCA.

The baseline General and Reserve category quotas are 587.9 mt and 31.2 mt, respectively. The General category baseline subquota is further suballocated to different time periods. Relevant to this action, the subquota for the September time period is 155.8 mt. To date for 2022, NMFS has published three actions that have resulted in adjustments to the General and Reserve category quotas, including the allowable carryover of underharvest from 2021 to 2022 (87 FR 5737, February 2, 2022; 87 FR 33049, June 1, 2022; 87 FR 43447, July 21, 2022). The current adjusted Reserve category quota is 276.7 mt.

Under § 635.27(a)(9), NMFS has the authority to transfer quota among fishing categories or subcategories after considering the determination criteria provided under § 635.27(a)(8). NMFS has considered all of the relevant determination criteria and their applicability to this inseason quota transfer. These considerations include, but are not limited to, the following.

Regarding the usefulness of information obtained from catches in the particular category for biological sampling and monitoring of the status of the stock (§ 635.27(a)(8)(i)), biological samples collected from BFT landed by General category fishermen and provided by BFT dealers provide NMFS with valuable parts and data for ongoing scientific studies of BFT age and growth, migration, and reproductive status. Additional opportunity to land BFT in the General category would support the continued collection of a broad range of data for these studies and for stock monitoring purposes.

Regarding the likelihood of closure of the General category fishery if no adjustment is made (§ 635.27(a)(8)(ii) and (ix)), NMFS considered the catches and catch rates of the General category quota to date (including during the summer/fall and winter fisheries in the last several years). NMFS also took into consideration the final rule that set restricted-fishing days for the General Category through November 30, 2022 (87 FR 33056, June 1, 2022). To date, preliminary landings data indicate that the General category landed a cumulative total of 391.1 mt through August 31, which exceeds the cumulative adjusted quota available through August 31 (370.6 mt) by 20.5 mt. While the General category September time period subquota has not yet been exceeded, without a quota transfer at this time, based on catch rates in recent years in comparison to the available quota, NMFS anticipates it would likely need to close the General category fishery shortly. Once the fishery is closed, participants would have to stop BFT fishing activities even though commercial-sized BFT remain available in the areas where General category permitted vessels operate at this time of year. Transferring 90.5 mt of BFT quota from the Reserve category would account for the 20.5 mt (391.1 mt−370.6 mt = 20.5 mt) of accrued overharvest from the prior time periods and result in an additional 70 mt (90.5 mt−20.5 mt = 70 mt) being available for the September 2022 subquota time period, thus effectively providing limited additional opportunities to harvest the U.S. BFT quota while avoiding exceeding it.

Regarding the projected ability of the vessels fishing under the General category quota to harvest the additional amount of BFT quota transferred before the end of the fishing year (§ 635.27(a)(8)(iii)), NMFS considered General category landings over the last several years and landings to date this year. Landings are highly variable and depend on access to commercial-sized BFT and fishing conditions, among other factors. A portion of the transferred quota covers the 20.5 mt overharvest in the category to date, and NMFS anticipates that General category participants will be able to harvest the remaining 70 mt of transferred BFT quota by the end of the subquota time period. NMFS may adjust each time period's subquota based on overharvest or underharvest in the prior period and may transfer subquota from one time period to another time period. By allowing for such quota adjustments and transfers, NMFS anticipates that the General category quota would be used before the end of the fishing year. Thus, this quota transfer would allow fishermen to take advantage of the availability of BFT on the fishing grounds and provide a reasonable opportunity to harvest the available U.S. BFT quota.

NMFS also considered the estimated amounts by which quotas for other gear categories of the fishery might be exceeded (§ 635.27(a)(8)(iv)) and the ability to account for all 2022 landings and dead discards. In the last several years, total U.S. BFT landings have been below the available U.S. quota such that the United States has carried forward the maximum amount of underharvest allowed by ICCAT from one year to the next. NMFS recently took such an action to carryover the allowable 127.3 mt of underharvest from 2021 to 2022 (87 FR 33049, June 1, 2022). NMFS will need to account for 2022 landings and dead discards within the adjusted U.S. quota, consistent with ICCAT recommendations, and anticipates having sufficient quota to do that.

NMFS also considered the effects of the adjustment on the BFT stock and the effects of the transfer on accomplishing the objectives of the FMP (§ 635.27(a)(8)(v) and (vi)). This transfer would be consistent with established quotas and subquotas, which are implemented consistent with ICCAT recommendations (established in Recommendation 21-07), ATCA, and the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments. In establishing these quotas and subquotas and associated management measures, ICCAT and NMFS considered the best scientific information available, objectives for stock management and status, and effects on the stock. This quota transfer is in line with the established management measures and stock status determinations. Another principal consideration is the objective of providing opportunities to harvest the available General category quota without exceeding the annual quota, based on the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments, including to achieve optimum yield on a continuing basis and to optimize the ability of all permit categories to harvest available BFT quota allocations (related to § 635.27(a)(8)(x)). Specific to the General category, this includes providing opportunities equitably across all time periods.

Given these considerations, NMFS is transferring 90.5 mt of the available 276.7 mt of Reserve category quota to the General category. Of this amount, 20.5 mt accounts for preliminary overharvest of the January through March and June through August time period subquotas, and 70 mt is added to the September subquota to provide further opportunities for General category fishermen to participate in the September General category fishery. Therefore, NMFS adjusts the General category September 2022 subquota to 225.5 mt after accounting for the 20.5 mt of overharvest for the prior 2022 time periods and adjusts the Reserve category quota to 186.2 mt (276.7 mt−90.5 mt = 186.2 mt). The General category fishery will remain open until September 30, 2022, or until the adjusted General category quota is reached, whichever comes first.

NMFS will continue to monitor the BFT fishery closely. Dealers are required to submit landing reports within 24 hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Late reporting by dealers compromises NMFS' ability to timely implement actions such as quota and retention limit adjustments, as well as closures, and may result in enforcement actions. Additionally, and separate from the dealer reporting requirement, General category and HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessel owners are required to report the catch of all BFT retained or discarded dead within 24 hours of the landing(s) or end of each trip, by accessing hmspermits.noaa.gov, by using the HMS Catch Reporting app, or calling 888-872-8862 (Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.).

Depending on the level of fishing effort and catch rates of BFT, NMFS may determine that additional adjustments are necessary to ensure available quota is not exceeded, or to enhance scientific data collection from, and fishing opportunities in, all geographic areas. If needed, subsequent adjustments will be published in the Federal Register . In addition, fishermen may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Line at 978-281-9260, or access hmspermits.noaa.gov, for updates on quota monitoring and inseason adjustments.

NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and regulations at 50 CFR part 635 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the following reasons:

The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments provide for inseason retention limit adjustments to respond to the unpredictable nature of BFT availability on the fishing grounds, the migratory nature of this species, and the regional variations in the BFT fishery. Affording prior notice and opportunity for public comment on the quota transfer for the September 2022 time period is impracticable. The General category fishery is underway, there was an exceedance of the August subquota, and while the September subquota has not yet been exceeded, NMFS anticipates that it will likely need to close the General category soon. Thus, NMFS needs to take this quota transfer action quickly. Delaying the action is contrary to the public interest, not only because it would likely result in a General category closure and associated costs to the fishery, but also administrative costs due to further agency action needed to re-open the fishery after quota is transferred. The delay would preclude the fishery from harvesting BFT that are available on the fishing grounds and that might otherwise become unavailable during a delay. This action does not raise conservation and management concerns. Transferring quota from the Reserve category to the General category does not affect the overall U.S. BFT quota, and available data show the adjustment would have a minimal risk of exceeding the ICCAT-allocated quota. NMFS notes that the public had an opportunity to comment on the underlying rulemakings that established the U.S. BFT quota and the inseason adjustment criteria. Therefore, the AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 533(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment. For all of the above reasons, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 5523(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.

Atlantic highly migratory species (HMS) fisheries, including BFT fisheries, are managed under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. ) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ). The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its amendments are implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27 divides the U.S. BFT quota recommended by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and as implemented by the United States among the various domestic fishing categories, per the allocations established in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments. NMFS is required under the Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest quotas under relevant international fishery agreements such as the ICCAT Convention, which is implemented domestically pursuant to ATCA.

Under § 635.28(a)(1), NMFS files a closure notice with the Office of the Federal Register for publication when a BFT quota is reached or is projected to be reached. Retaining, possessing, or landing BFT under a quota category is prohibited on or after the effective date and time of a closure notice for that category, for the remainder of the fishing year, until the opening of the relevant subsequent quota period, or until such date as specified.

The baseline U.S. BFT quota is 1,316.14 mt (§ 635.27(a)). The current baseline quota for the Harpoon category is 47.8 mt. Effective July 19, 2022, NMFS transferred 30 mt from the Reserve category to the Harpoon category, resulting in an adjusted subquota of 78.7 mt for the Harpoon category and 276.7 mt for the Reserve category (87 FR 43447, July 21, 2022).

As of September 1, 2022, reported landings for the Harpoon category total approximately 70.8 mt. Based on these landings data, as well as average catch rates and anticipated fishing conditions, NMFS projects that the adjusted Harpoon category quota of 78.7 mt will be reached shortly. Therefore, retaining, possessing, or landing large medium or giant ( i.e., measuring 73 inches (185 cm) curved fork length or greater) BFT by persons aboard vessels permitted in the Atlantic tunas Harpoon category must cease at 11:30 p.m. local time on September 5, 2022. The Harpoon category BFT fishery will be closed for the remainder of the Harpoon category season, which ends November 15, 2022, and thus for the year. The Harpoon category will reopen automatically on June 1, 2023, for the 2023 fishing season. This action applies to Atlantic Tunas Harpoon category (commercial) permitted vessels, and is taken consistent with the regulations at § 635.28(a)(1).

NMFS will continue to monitor the BFT fisheries closely. Dealers are required to submit landing reports within 24 hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Late reporting by dealers compromises NMFS' ability to implement actions in a timely manner such as quota and retention limit adjustment, as well as closures, and may result in enforcement actions. Additionally, and separate from the dealer reporting requirement, Harpoon category vessel owners are required to report the catch of all BFT retained or discarded dead within 24 hours of the landing(s) or end of each trip, by accessing www.hmspermits.noaa.gov, using the HMS Catch Reporting app, or calling 888-872-8862 (Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.).

Depending on the level of fishing effort and catch rates of BFT, NMFS may determine that additional adjustments are necessary to ensure available subquotas are not exceeded or to enhance scientific data collection from, and fishing opportunities in, all geographic areas. If needed, subsequent adjustments will be published in the Federal Register . In addition, fishermen may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Line at (978) 281-9260, or access www.hmspermits.noaa.gov, for updates on quota monitoring and inseason adjustments.

NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This action is required by 50 CFR part 635, which was issued pursuant to section 304(c), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

The Assistant Administrator for NMFS finds that pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), there is good cause to waive prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, for the following reasons:

The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments provide for inseason retention limit adjustments and fishery closures to respond to the unpredictable nature of BFT availability on the fishing grounds, the migratory nature of this species, and the regional variations in the BFT fishery. Providing for prior notice and an opportunity to comment is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This fishery is currently underway and delaying this action could result in BFT landings exceeding the Harpoon category quota. For all of the above reasons, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 et seq.

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 (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.

NMFS closed directed fishing for Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) on January 20, 2022 (87 FR 3048, January 20, 2022).

NMFS has determined that as of September 2, 2022, approximately 900 metric tons of Pacific cod remain in the 2022 Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) allocated to the American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI. Therefore, in accordance with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully use the 2022 TAC of Pacific cod in the BSAI, NMFS is terminating the previous closure and is opening directed fishing for Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI. The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, considered the following factors in reaching this decision: (1) the current catch of Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI and, (2) the harvest capacity and stated intent on future harvesting patterns of vessels in participating in this fishery.

NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This action is required by 50 CFR part 679, which was issued pursuant to section 304(b), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), there is good cause to waive prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on this action, as notice and comment would be 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 opening of directed fishing for Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in 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 September 6, 2022.

The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA 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.

Without this inseason adjustment, NMFS could not allow the fishery for Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI to be harvested in an expedient manner and in accordance with the regulatory schedule. Under § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this action to the above address until September 23, 2022.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.