Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions-Fall 2017

REGULATORY INFORMATION SERVICE CENTER

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions—Fall 2017

AGENCY:

Regulatory Information Service Center.

ACTION:

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.

SUMMARY:

Publication of the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions and the Regulatory Plan represent key components of the regulatory planning mechanism prescribed in Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” January 30, 2017, and Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” February 24, 2017. The fall editions of the Unified Agenda include the agency regulatory plans required by E.O. 12866, which identify regulatory priorities and provide additional detail about the most important significant regulatory actions that agencies expect to take in the coming year.

In addition, the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies publish semiannual “regulatory flexibility agendas” describing regulatory actions they are developing that will have significant effects on small businesses and other small entities (5 U.S.C. 602).

The Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (Unified Agenda), published in the fall and spring, helps agencies fulfill all of these requirements. All federal regulatory agencies have chosen to publish their regulatory agendas as part of this publication. The complete Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan can be found online at

http://www.reginfo.gov

and a reduced print version can be found in the

Federal Register

. Information regarding obtaining printed copies can also be found on the

Reginfo.gov

website (or below, VI. How Can Users Get Copies of the Plan and the Agenda?).

The fall 2017 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

includes the Regulatory Plan and agency regulatory flexibility agendas, in accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency regulatory flexibility agendas contain only those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The complete fall 2017 Unified Agenda contains the Regulatory Plans of 30 Federal agencies and 60 Federal agency regulatory agendas.

ADDRESSES:

Regulatory Information Service Center (MVE), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, 2219F, Washington, DC 20405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information about specific regulatory actions, please refer to the agency contact listed for each entry.

To provide comment on or to obtain further information about this publication, contact: John C. Thomas, Executive Director, Regulatory Information Service Center (MVE), U.S. General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, 2219F, Washington, DC 20405, (202) 482-7340. You may also send comments to us by email at:

risc@gsa.gov

.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

I. What are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda?

II. Why are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Published?

III. How are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Organized?

IV. What information appears for each entry?

V. Abbreviations

VI. How can users get copies of the Plan and the Agenda?

Introduction to the Fall 2017 Regulatory Plan

AGENCY REGULATORY PLANS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Department of the Treasury

Department of Veterans Affairs

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

General Services Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Archives and Records Administration

Office of Personnel Management

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Small Business Administration

Social Security Administration

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Federal Trade Commission

National Indian Gaming Commission

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

AGENCY REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY AGENDAS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Department of the Treasury

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

Small Business Administration

Joint Authority

Department of Defense/General Services Administration/National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Federal Acquisition Regulation)

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Federal Communications Commission

Federal Reserve System

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Securities and Exchange Commission

Surface Transportation Board

INTRODUCTION TO THE REGULATORY PLAN AND THE UNIFIED AGENDA OF FEDERAL REGULATORY AND DEREGULATORY ACTIONS

I. What are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda?

The Regulatory Plan

serves as a defining statement of the Administration's regulatory and deregulatory policies and priorities. The Plan is part of the fall edition of the Unified Agenda. Each participating agency's regulatory plan contains: (1) A narrative statement of the agency's regulatory and deregulatory priorities, and, for the most part, (2) a description of the most important significant regulatory and deregulatory actions that the agency reasonably expects to issue in proposed or final form during the upcoming fiscal year. This edition includes the regulatory plans of 30 agencies.

The Unified Agenda

provides information about regulations that the Government is considering or reviewing. The Unified Agenda has appeared in the

Federal Register

twice each year since 1983 and has been available online since 1995. The complete Unified Agenda is available to the public at

http://www.reginfo.gov

. The online Unified Agenda offers flexible search tools and access to the historic Unified Agenda database to1995. The complete online edition of the Unified Agenda includes regulatory agendas from 67 Federal agencies. Agencies of the United States Congress are not included.

The fall 2017 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

consists of The Regulatory Plan and agency regulatory flexibility agendas, in accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency regulatory flexibility agendas contain only those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Printed entries display only the fields required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Complete agenda information for those entries appears, in a uniform format, in the online Unified Agenda at

http://www.reginfo.gov

.

The following agencies have no entries for inclusion in the printed regulatory flexibility agenda. An asterisk (*) indicates agencies that appear in The Regulatory Plan. The regulatory agendas of these agencies are available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov

.

Cabinet Departments

Department of State

Department of Veterans Affairs *

Other Executive Agencies

Agency for International Development

American Battle Monuments Commission

Commission on Civil Rights

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled

Corporation for National and Community Service

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission *

Institute of Museum and Library Services

National Aeronautics and Space Administration *

National Archives and Records Administration *

National Endowment for the Arts

National Endowment for the Humanities

National Mediation Board

National Science Foundation

Office of Government Ethics

Office of Management and Budget

Office of Personnel Management *

Office of the United States Trade Representative

Peace Corps

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Presidio Trust

Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board

Railroad Retirement Board

Social Security Administration *

Tennessee Valley Authority

Independent Agencies

Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Farm Credit Administration

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Federal Housing Finance Agency

Federal Maritime Commission

Federal Trade Commission *

National Credit Union Administration

National Indian Gaming Commission *

National Labor Relations Board

National Transportation Safety Board

Postal Regulatory Commission

Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

The Regulatory Information Service Center compiles the Unified Agenda for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), part of the Office of Management and Budget. OIRA is responsible for overseeing the Federal Government's regulatory, paperwork, and information resource management activities, including implementation of Executive Order 12866 (incorporated in Executive Order 13563). The Center also provides information about Federal regulatory activity to the President and his Executive Office, the Congress, agency officials, and the public.

The activities included in the Agenda are, in general, those that will have a regulatory action within the next 12 months. Agencies may choose to include activities that will have a longer timeframe than 12 months. Agency agendas also show actions or reviews completed or withdrawn since the last Unified Agenda. Executive Order 12866 does not require agencies to include regulations concerning military or foreign affairs functions or regulations related to agency organization, management, or personnel matters.

Agencies prepared entries for this publication to give the public notice of their plans to review, propose, and issue regulations. They have tried to predict their activities over the next 12 months as accurately as possible, but dates and schedules are subject to change. Agencies may withdraw some of the regulations now under development, and they may issue or propose other regulations not included in their agendas. Agency actions in the rulemaking process may occur before or after the dates they have listed. The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda do not create a legal obligation on agencies to adhere to schedules in this publication or to confine their regulatory activities to those regulations that appear within it.

II. Why Are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Published?

The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda

helps agencies comply with their obligations under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and various Executive orders and other statutes.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

requires agencies to identify those rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Agencies meet that requirement by including the information in their submissions for the Unified Agenda. Agencies may also indicate those regulations that they are reviewing as part of their periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610). Executive Order 13272, “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” signed August 13, 2002 (67 FR 53461), provides additional guidance on compliance with the Act.

Executive Order 12866

Executive Order 12866,

“Regulatory Planning and Review,” September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), requires covered agencies to prepare an agenda of all regulations under development or review. The Order also requires that certain agencies prepare annually a regulatory plan of their “most important significant regulatory actions,” which appears as part of the fall Unified Agenda. Executive Order 13497, signed January 30, 2009 (74 FR 6113), revoked the amendments to Executive Order 12866 that were contained in Executive Order 13258 and Executive Order 13422.

Executive Order 13771

Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” January 30, 2017 (82 FR 9339) requires each agency to identify for elimination two prior regulations for every one new regulation issued, and the cost of planned regulations be

prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.

Executive Order 13777

Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” February 24, 2017 (82 FR 12285) requires each agency to designate an agency official as its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO). Each RRO shall oversee the implementation of regulatory reform initiatives and policies to ensure that agencies effectively carry out regulatory reforms, consistent with applicable law. The Executive Order also directs that each agency designate a regulatory Reform Task Force.

Executive Order 13563

Executive Order 13563,

“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” January 18, 2011 (76 FR 3821) supplements and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing contemporary regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866, which includes the general principles of regulation and public participation, and orders integration and innovation in coordination across agencies; flexible approaches where relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory approaches; scientific integrity in any scientific or technological information and processes used to support the agencies' regulatory actions; and retrospective analysis of existing regulations.

Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132,

“Federalism,” August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255), directs agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have “federalism implications” as defined in the Order. Under the Order, an agency that is proposing a regulation with federalism implications, which either preempt State law or impose non-statutory unfunded substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments, must consult with State and local officials early in the process of developing the regulation. In addition, the agency must provide to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a federalism summary impact statement for such a regulation, which consists of a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with State and local officials, a summary of their concerns and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the extent to which those concerns have been met. As part of this effort, agencies include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether their regulatory actions may have an effect on the various levels of government and whether those actions have federalism implications.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104-4, title II) requires agencies to prepare written assessments of the costs and benefits of significant regulatory actions “that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any 1 year.” The requirement does not apply to independent regulatory agencies, nor does it apply to certain subject areas excluded by section 4 of the Act. Affected agencies identify in the Unified Agenda those regulatory actions they believe are subject to title II of the Act.

Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211,

“Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355), directs agencies to provide, to the extent possible, information regarding the adverse effects that agency actions may have on the supply, distribution, and use of energy. Under the Order, the agency must prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, for “those matters identified as significant energy actions.” As part of this effort, agencies may optionally include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether they have prepared or plan to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for their regulatory actions.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

(Pub. L. 104-121, title II) established a procedure for congressional review of rules (5 U.S.C. 801

et seq.

), which defers, unless exempted, the effective date of a “major” rule for at least 60 days from the publication of the final rule in the

Federal Register

. The Act specifies that a rule is “major” if it has resulted, or is likely to result, in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of OIRA will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

III. How Are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Organized?

The Regulatory Plan

appears in part II in a daily edition of the

Federal Register

. The Plan is a single document beginning with an introduction, followed by a table of contents, followed by each agency's section of the Plan. Following the Plan in the

Federal Register

, as separate parts, are the regulatory flexibility agendas for each agency whose agenda includes entries for rules which are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities or rules that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each printed agenda appears as a separate part. The sections of the Plan and the parts of the Unified Agenda are organized alphabetically in four groups: Cabinet departments; other executive agencies; the Federal Acquisition Regulation, a joint authority (Agenda only); and independent regulatory agencies. Agencies may in turn be divided into subagencies. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the agency's printed entries that follow. Each agency's part of the Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that agency. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the agency's printed entries that follow.

Each agency's section of the Plan contains a narrative statement of regulatory priorities and, for most agencies, a description of the agency's most important significant regulatory and deregulatory actions. Each agency's part of the Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that agency plus descriptions of the agency's regulatory and deregulatory actions.

The online, complete Unified Agenda contains the preambles of all participating agencies. Unlike the printed edition, the online Agenda has no fixed ordering. In the online Agenda, users can select the particular agencies' agendas they want to see. Users have broad flexibility to specify the characteristics of the entries of interest to them by choosing the desired responses to individual data fields. To see a listing of all of an agency's entries, a user can select the agency without specifying any particular characteristics of entries.

Each entry in the Agenda is associated with one of five rulemaking stages. The rulemaking stages are:

1.

Prerule Stage

—Actions agencies will undertake to determine whether or how to initiate rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) and may include Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) and reviews of existing regulations.

2.

Proposed Rule Stage

—Actions for which agencies plan to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking as the next step in their rulemaking process or for which the closing date of the NPRM Comment Period is the next step.

3.

Final Rule Stage

—Actions for which agencies plan to publish a final rule or an interim final rule or to take other final action as the next step.

4.

Long-Term Actions

—Items under development but for which the agency does not expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months after publication of this edition of the Unified Agenda. Some of the entries in this section may contain abbreviated information.

5.

Completed Actions

—Actions or reviews the agency has completed or withdrawn since publishing its last agenda. This section also includes items the agency began and completed between issues of the Agenda.

Long-Term Actions are rulemakings reported during the publication cycle that are outside of the required 12-month reporting period for which the Agenda was intended. Completed Actions in the publication cycle are rulemakings that are ending their lifecycle either by Withdrawal or completion of the rulemaking process. Therefore, the Long-Term and Completed RINs do not represent the ongoing, forward-looking nature intended for reporting developing rulemakings in the Agenda pursuant to Executive Order 12866, section 4(b) and 4(c). To further differentiate these two stages of rulemaking in the Unified Agenda from active rulemakings, Long-Term and Completed Actions are reported separately from active rulemakings, which can be any of the first three stages of rulemaking listed above. A separate search function is provided on

http://reginfo.gov

to search for Completed and Long-Term Actions apart from each other and active RINs.

A bullet (•) preceding the title of an entry indicates that the entry is appearing in the Unified Agenda for the first time.

In the printed edition, all entries are numbered sequentially from the beginning to the end of the publication. The sequence number preceding the title of each entry identifies the location of the entry in this edition. The sequence number is used as the reference in the printed table of contents. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda because the unique Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is able to provide this cross-reference capability.

Editions of the Unified Agenda prior to fall 2007 contained several indexes, which identified entries with various characteristics. These included regulatory actions for which agencies believe that the Regulatory Flexibility Act may require a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, actions selected for periodic review under section 610(c) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and actions that may have federalism implications as defined in Executive Order 13132 or other effects on levels of government. These indexes are no longer compiled, because users of the online Unified Agenda have the flexibility to search for entries with any combination of desired characteristics. The online edition retains the Unified Agenda's subject index based on the

Federal Register

Thesaurus of Indexing Terms. In addition, online users have the option of searching Agenda text fields for words or phrases.

IV. What information appears for each entry?

All entries in the online Unified Agenda contain uniform data elements including, at a minimum, the following information:

Title of the Regulation

—A brief description of the subject of the regulation. In the printed edition, the notation “Section 610 Review” following the title indicates that the agency has selected the rule for its periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610(c)). Some agencies have indicated completions of section 610 reviews or rulemaking actions resulting from completed section 610 reviews. In the online edition, these notations appear in a separate field.

Priority

—An indication of the significance of the regulation. Agencies assign each entry to one of the following five categories of significance.

(1) Economically Significant

As defined in Executive Order 12866, a rulemaking action that will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or will adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities. The definition of an “economically significant” rule is similar but not identical to the definition of a “major” rule under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121). (See below.)

(2) Other Significant

A rulemaking that is not Economically Significant but is considered Significant by the agency. This category includes rules that the agency anticipates will be reviewed under Executive Order 12866 or rules that are a priority of the agency head. These rules may or may not be included in the agency's regulatory plan.

(3) Substantive, Nonsignificant

A rulemaking that has substantive impacts, but is neither Significant, nor Routine and Frequent, nor Informational/Administrative/Other.

(4) Routine and Frequent

A rulemaking that is a specific case of a multiple recurring application of a regulatory program in the Code of Federal Regulations and that does not alter the body of the regulation.

(5) Informational/Administrative/Other

A rulemaking that is primarily informational or pertains to agency matters not central to accomplishing the agency's regulatory mandate but that the agency places in the Unified Agenda to inform the public of the activity.

Major

—Whether the rule is “major” under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121) because it has resulted or is likely to result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

Unfunded Mandates

—Whether the rule is covered by section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). The Act requires that, before issuing an NPRM likely to result in a mandate that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more than $100 million in 1 year, agencies, other than independent regulatory agencies, shall prepare a written statement containing an assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate.

Legal Authority

—The section(s) of the United States Code (U.S.C.) or Public Law (Pub. L.) or the Executive order (E.O.) that authorize(s) the regulatory action. Agencies may provide popular name references to laws in addition to these citations.

CFR Citation

—The section(s) of the Code of Federal Regulations that will be affected by the action.

Legal Deadline

—Whether the action is subject to a statutory or judicial deadline, the date of that deadline, and

whether the deadline pertains to an NPRM, a Final Action, or some other action.

Abstract

—A brief description of the problem the regulation will address; the need for a Federal solution; to the extent available, alternatives that the agency is considering to address the problem; and potential costs and benefits of the action.

Timetable

—The dates and citations (if available) for all past steps and a projected date for at least the next step for the regulatory action. A date displayed in the form 12/00/14 means the agency is predicting the month and year the action will take place but not the day it will occur. In some instances, agencies may indicate what the next action will be, but the date of that action is “To Be Determined.” “Next Action Undetermined” indicates the agency does not know what action it will take next.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

—Whether an analysis is required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) because the rulemaking action is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the Act.

Small Entities Affected

—The types of small entities (businesses, governmental jurisdictions, or organizations) on which the rulemaking action is likely to have an impact as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Some agencies have chosen to indicate likely effects on small entities even though they believe that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis will not be required.

Government Levels Affected

—Whether the action is expected to affect levels of government and, if so, whether the governments are State, local, tribal, or Federal.

International Impacts

—Whether the regulation is expected to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise may be of interest to the Nation's international trading partners.

Federalism

—Whether the action has “federalism implications” as defined in Executive Order 13132. This term refers to actions “that have substantial direct effects 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.” Independent regulatory agencies are not required to supply this information.

Included in the Regulatory Plan

—Whether the rulemaking was included in the agency's current regulatory plan published in fall 2015.

Agency Contact

—The name and phone number of at least one person in the agency who is knowledgeable about the rulemaking action. The agency may also provide the title, address, fax number, email address, and TDD for each agency contact.

Some agencies have provided the following optional information:

RIN Information URL

—The internet address of a site that provides more information about the entry.

Public Comment URL

—The internet address of a site that will accept public comments on the entry. Alternatively, timely public comments may be submitted at the Governmentwide e-rulemaking site,

http://www.regulations.gov

.

Additional Information

—Any information an agency wishes to include that does not have a specific corresponding data element.

Compliance Cost to the Public

—The estimated gross compliance cost of the action.

Affected Sectors

—The industrial sectors that the action may most affect, either directly or indirectly. Affected sectors are identified by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.

Energy Effects

—An indication of whether the agency has prepared or plans to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for the action, as required by Executive Order 13211 “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” signed May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355).

Related RINs

—One or more past or current RIN(s) associated with activity related to this action, such as merged RINs, split RINs, new activity for previously completed RINs, or duplicate RINs.

Statement of Need

—A description of the need for the regulatory action.

Summary of the Legal Basis

—A description of the legal basis for the action, including whether any aspect of the action is required by statute or court order.

Alternatives

—A description of the alternatives the agency has considered or will consider as required by section 4(c)(1)(B) of Executive Order 12866.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits

—A description of preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits of the action.

Risks

—A description of the magnitude of the risk the action addresses, the amount by which the agency expects the action to reduce this risk, and the relation of the risk and this risk reduction effort to other risks and risk reduction efforts within the agency's jurisdiction.

V. Abbreviations

The following abbreviations appear throughout this publication:

ANPRM

—An Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is a preliminary notice, published in the

Federal Register

, announcing that an agency is considering a regulatory action. An agency may issue an ANPRM before it develops a detailed proposed rule. An ANPRM describes the general area that may be subject to regulation and usually asks for public comment on the issues and options being discussed. An ANPRM is issued only when an agency believes it needs to gather more information before proceeding to a notice of proposed rulemaking.

CFR

—The Code of Federal Regulations is an annual codification of the general and permanent regulations published in the

Federal Register

by the agencies of the Federal Government. The Code is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area subject to Federal regulation. The CFR is keyed to and kept up to date by the daily issues of the

Federal Register

.

E.O.

—An Executive order is a directive from the President to Executive agencies, issued under constitutional or statutory authority. Executive orders are published in the

Federal Register

and in title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

FR

—The

Federal Register

is a daily Federal Government publication that provides a uniform system for publishing Presidential documents, all proposed and final regulations, notices of meetings, and other official documents issued by Federal agencies.

FY

—The Federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.

□

NPRM

—A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the document an agency issues and publishes in the

Federal Register

that describes and solicits public comments on a proposed regulatory action. Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), an NPRM must include, at a minimum: A statement of the time, place, and nature of the public rulemaking proceeding;

□ A reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.

PL (or Pub. L.)

—A public law is a law passed by Congress and signed by the President or enacted over his veto. It has general applicability, unlike a private law that applies only to those persons or entities specifically designated.

Public laws are numbered in sequence throughout the 2-year life of each Congress; for example, Public Law 112-4 is the fourth public law of the 112th Congress.

RFA

—A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is a description and analysis of the impact of a rule on small entities, including small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and certain small not-for-profit organizations. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) requires each agency to prepare an initial RFA for public comment when it is required to publish an NPRM and to make available a final RFA when the final rule is published, unless the agency head certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

RIN

—The Regulation Identifier Number is assigned by the Regulatory Information Service Center to identify each regulatory action listed in the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda, as directed by Executive Order 12866 (section 4(b)). Additionally, OMB has asked agencies to include RINs in the headings of their Rule and Proposed Rule documents when publishing them in the

Federal Register

, to make it easier for the public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions throughout their development.

Seq. No.

—The sequence number identifies the location of an entry in the printed edition of the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda. Note that a specific regulatory action will have the same RIN throughout its development but will generally have different sequence numbers if it appears in different printed editions of the Unified Agenda. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda.

U.S.C.

—The United States Code is a consolidation and codification of all general and permanent laws of the United States. The U.S.C. is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area of Federal law.

VI. How can users get copies of the Plan and the Agenda?

Copies of the

Federal Register

issue containing the printed edition of The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda (agency regulatory flexibility agendas) are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Telephone: (202) 512-1800 or 1-866-512-1800 (toll-free).

Copies of individual agency materials may be available directly from the agency or may be found on the agency's website. Please contact the particular agency for further information.

All editions of The Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions since fall 1995 are available in electronic form at

http://reginfo.gov,

along with flexible search tools.

The Government Printing Office's GPO FDsys website contains copies of the Agendas and Regulatory Plans that have been printed in the

Federal Register

. These documents are available at

http://www.fdsys.gov

.

Dated: November 29, 2017.

John C. Thomas,

Executive Director.

Introduction to the Fall 2017 Regulatory Plan

Following statutory directions, the Executive Branch implements many federal policies through regulatory action in areas as diverse as homeland security, environmental protection, energy policy, transportation, federal land management, education, and commerce. Over many decades, federal agencies have imposed countless regulatory requirements on individuals, businesses, landowners, and state and local governments. Some of these regulations serve important public purposes. Other regulations, however, are outdated, duplicative, or unnecessary, yet they continue to impose costly burdens. President Trump has committed to reducing the regulatory burden on the American public in order to promote economic growth, job creation, and innovation.

This Fall 2017 Regulatory Plan reflects a fundamental shift. The Trump Administration recognizes that excessive and unnecessary federal regulations limit individual freedom and suppress the innovation and entrepreneurship that make America great. Starting with confidence in private markets and individual choices, this Administration is reassessing existing regulatory burdens. In the 2017 Plan, Agencies have identified regulatory actions ripe for reform and are working to eliminate or modify them. This Administration also approaches the imposition of new regulatory requirements with caution to ensure that regulations are consistent with law, necessary to correct a substantial market failure, and net beneficial to the public. Furthermore, the Plan, along with the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (“Agenda”), identifies the Administration's priorities in manner that is transparent and accessible to the public.

Our regulatory philosophy and approach emphasize the connection between limited government intervention and individual liberty. Regulatory policy should serve the American people by staying within legal limits and administering the law with respect for due process and fair notice. The 2017 Plan sets forth the Administration's roadmap for a more limited, effective, and accountable regulatory policy.

Federal Regulatory Policy

The 2017 Plan both sets a new direction in regulatory policy and preserves many longstanding regulatory best practices. Stressing that “it is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations,” President Trump directed all federal agencies to eliminate two regulations for each new one implemented and to reduce new regulatory costs to zero in Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” January 30, 2017). He also created regulatory reform officers and regulatory reform taskforces in each agency in Executive Order 13777 (“Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” February 24, 2017). Within the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”) implements federal regulatory policy and has led efforts to implement these presidential directives, working with agencies to identify deregulatory actions and eliminate regulatory burdens.

OIRA also continues to respect and pursue longstanding principles and practices of centralized regulatory review. These principles, set out in President Clinton's Executive Order 12866, emphasize that agencies should regulate only when necessary, when consistent with law, and in a manner that produces real net benefits for the American people. The Administration also takes seriously retrospective review and the imperative to evaluate the actual costs and benefits of existing regulations. The President's two-for-one directive and the creation of a regulatory cap requires that agencies eliminate unnecessary or excessively burdensome rules as part of their regulatory planning.

OIRA works with agencies to promote sound science and economic analysis. Agencies should develop improved regulatory impact analyses of the costs and benefits of their actions, relying on reasonable assumptions and public input. In some instances, analysis will require revisiting previous regulatory impact assessments to ensure that they

reflect the best possible estimate of costs and benefits. Moving forward, it requires rigor and fairness in assessing the actual impacts of new regulatory and deregulatory policies.

This Administration's regulatory philosophy also emphasizes the rule of law, including constitutional, statutory, and procedural limits on administrative action. For instance, OIRA requires agencies to indicate the legal authority for regulatory actions, whether from a statute or judicial order. We look closely at planned regulatory and deregulatory actions to ensure that they follow the law and the correct administrative procedures.

Moreover, the Administration has reinforced the importance of fair notice and due process. In particular, this means agencies should closely examine their use of sub-regulatory actions, such as guidance documents, enforcement manuals, interpretive rules, “FAQs,” and the like. Such documents can serve an important role in explaining existing statutory or regulatory requirements; however, they should not be used to impose new or additional legal obligations or requirements. Accordingly, this Administration has encouraged agencies to take a close look at existing guidance documents to assess whether some of them should be withdrawn or modified, or whether their requirements should go through a process of notice and comment rulemaking. Limiting guidance to its intended purpose of clarifying existing law rather than making new law will provide greater transparency about the regulatory process and ensure that regulated entities and the public have notice and an opportunity to comment on significant changes in regulatory requirements.

These specific policies rest on foundational principles of the proper role of the Executive Branch in our constitutional system of separation of powers. Agencies should administer the law found in statutes, not make new law, and they should respect the judicial role in enforcing limits on administrative power. Moreover, faithful execution of the laws requires the Administration be directly accountable for its regulatory policies and ensure that regulations and their enforcement benefit the American people.

2018 Regulatory Priorities

Reducing regulatory burdens.

One of the primary priorities reflected in the 2017 Regulatory Plan is the reduction of regulatory burdens. Accordingly, in 2018, across the Administration agencies anticipate eliminating and streamlining approximately three regulations for each new one imposed. Moreover, agencies are set to substantially reduce overall regulatory costs. This Regulatory Plan reflects a new direction that recognizes the costs of accumulated regulatory burdens and looks for ways to reduce those burdens by modifying or eliminating regulations; revising or eliminating guidance documents; and streamlining information collections.

Agencies have taken several approaches to identifying burdens that can be minimized or eliminated. Regulatory reform task forces have brought together political leadership and career staff to review and revise existing regulations. Agencies have sought extensive public comments, both through written submissions and public listening sessions. Other agencies have studied specific problems of overregulation and drafted comprehensive reports evaluating existing regulations. Based on extensive experience across administrations, OIRA has also worked with the agencies to identify potential areas for reform. These efforts by the agencies, in consultation with the public and OIRA, have yielded notable progress, as reflected in the agency Regulatory Plans that follow.

Efficacious new regulations.

Agencies have also planned new regulatory initiatives required by law or by a compelling public need. These actions should be guided by good regulatory practices, which include regulating only when necessary, carefully studying lawful alternatives, and engaging with the public and affected parties. Moreover, when proceeding with regulations, agencies should rely on sound science and thorough cost-benefit analysis. Unless specifically required by law, agencies should regulate only when the benefits substantially outweigh the costs, and OIRA will carefully examine each proposed regulation to ensure that it is the least burdensome regulatory approach that meets the relevant statutory standards.

Transparency and public access.

This Administration remains committed to transparency in the regulatory process, public access to information about regulatory policy, and public participation in proposed rules. OIRA is working with agencies to ensure that items listed on the Plan and Agenda reflect carefully considered and current policy priorities. In addition, with this Regulatory Plan and Fall Agenda, OIRA has taken a number of steps to improve transparency. For instance, we have published the “Inactive List,” a list of regulations agencies might pursue in the future. Although maintained for many years, the Inactive list was not previously available to the public. Publishing the Inactive List online allows the public a more complete picture of anticipated agency actions.

OIRA has also implemented enhanced categorization and online search capabilities for the Agenda, so the public can identify actions anticipated to be regulatory or deregulatory and other detailed information. We hope these enhancements will further public understanding of proposed regulatory actions and encourage participation in the regulatory process.

Conclusion

The agency plans that follow push against the inertia of steadily expanding regulatory burdens and represent this Administration's commitment to reducing regulations that no longer benefit our society. The plans also send a clear message that the public can invest and plan for the future without the looming threat of burdensome and unnecessary new regulations. OIRA looks forward to working with the agencies and all interested stakeholders to deliver meaningful regulatory reform to the American people.

Neomi Rao,

Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Department of Agriculture

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

1

National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard

0581-AD54

Proposed Rule Stage.

2

NOP: Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices

0581-AD75

Proposed Rule Stage.

3

Lacey Act Implementation Plan: De Minimis Exception and Composite Articles

0579-AD44

Proposed Rule Stage.

4

National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures

0579-AC60

Final Rule Stage.

5

Animal Welfare; Establishing De Minimis Exemptions From Licensing

0579-AD99

Final Rule Stage.

6

Child Nutrition Programs: Flexibilities for Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium Requirements

0584-AE53

Final Rule Stage.

7

Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection

0583-AD62

Proposed Rule Stage.

8

Administrative Issuances; Involving the Public in the Formulation of Forest Service Directives (Rule)

0596-AC65

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Commerce

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

9

Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys in the Gulf of Mexico

0648-BB38

Proposed Rule Stage.

10

Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported Fishing; Fisheries Enforcement; High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act

0648-BG11

Proposed Rule Stage.

11

Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Threatened Caribbean and Indo-Pacific Reef-Building Corals

0648-BG26

Proposed Rule Stage.

12

Commerce Trusted Trader Program

0648-BG51

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Defense

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

13

Earned Value Management Applicability (DFARS Case 2015-D038)

0750-AJ10

Proposed Rule Stage.

14

Contractor Purchasing System Review Threshold (DFARS Case 2017-D038)

0750-AJ48

Proposed Rule Stage.

15

Brand Name or Equal (DFARS Case 2017-D040)

0750-AJ50

Proposed Rule Stage.

16

Amendment to Mentor-Protégé Program (DFARS Case 2016-D011)

0750-AJ05

Final Rule Stage.

17

Use of the Government Property Clause (DFARS Case 2015-D035)

0750-AJ11

Final Rule Stage.

18

Repeal of Independent Research and Development Technical Interchange (DFARS Case 2017-D041)

0750-AJ51

Final Rule Stage.

19

Establishment of TRICARE Select and Other TRICARE Reforms

0720-AB70

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Education

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

20

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance

1870-AA14

Proposed Rule Stage.

21

Borrower Defense and Related Issues

1840-AD26

Proposed Rule Stage.

22

Program Integrity; Gainful Employment

1840-AD31

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Energy

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

23

Energy Conservation Standards and Definition for General Service Lamps

1904-AD09

Proposed Rule Stage.

24

Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Conventional Cooking Products

1904-AD15

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Health and Human Services

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage .

25

HIPAA Privacy Rule: Presumption of Good Faith of HealthCare Providers

0945-AA09

Proposed Rule Stage.

26

Health Information Technology: Interoperability and Certification Enhancements

0955-AA01

Proposed Rule Stage.

27

Certification of Opioid Treatment Programs

0930-AA27

Proposed Rule Stage.

28

Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records

0930-AA26

Final Rule Stage.

29

Mammography Quality Standards Act; Regulatory Amendments

0910-AH04

Proposed Rule Stage.

30

Medical Device De Novo Classification Process

0910-AH53

Proposed Rule Stage.

31

Requirement for Access or Safe Use of Certain Nonprescription Drug Products

0910-AH62

Proposed Rule Stage.

32

Medication Guides; Patient Medication Information

0910-AH68

Proposed Rule Stage.

33

Format and Content of Reports Intended to Demonstrate Substantial Equivalence

0910-AH89

Proposed Rule Stage.

34

340B Drug Pricing Program Ceiling Price and Manufacturer Civil Monetary Penalties Regulation

0906-AB12

Proposed Rule Stage.

35

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Revisions to the Vaccine Injury Table

0906-AB14

Proposed Rule Stage.

36

Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage and the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Programs for Contract Year 2019 (CMS-4182-P)

0938-AT08

Proposed Rule Stage.

37

Regulatory Provisions to Promote Program Efficiency, Transparency, and Burden Reduction (CMS-3346-P)

0938-AT23

Proposed Rule Stage.

38

Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System for Acute Care Hospitals and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System and FY 2019 Rates (CMS-1694-P)

0938-AT27

Proposed Rule Stage.

39

Requirements for Long-Term Care Facilities: Regulatory Provisions to Promote Program Efficiency, Transparency, and Burden Reduction (CMS-3347-P)

0938-AT36

Proposed Rule Stage.

40

Medicaid and CHIP Managed Care (CMS-2408-P)

0938-AT40

Proposed Rule Stage.

41

Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System

0970-AC72

Prerule Stage.

42

Head Start Service Duration Requirements

0970-AC73

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Homeland Security

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

43

Inadmissibility and Deportability on Public Charge Grounds

1615-AA22

Proposed Rule Stage.

44

Registration Requirement for Petitioners Seeking To File H-1B Petitions on Behalf of Aliens Subject to Numerical Limitations

1615-AB71

Proposed Rule Stage.

45

Rescission of International Entrepreneur Rule

1615-AC04

Proposed Rule Stage.

46

EB-5 Immigrant Investor Regional Center Program

1615-AC11

Proposed Rule Stage.

47

Strengthening the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa Classification Program

1615-AC13

Proposed Rule Stage.

48

Removing H-4 Dependent Spouses from the Class of Aliens Eligible for Employment Authorization

1615-AC15

Proposed Rule Stage.

49

EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program Modernization

1615-AC07

Final Rule Stage.

50

Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)

1651-AB04

Final Rule Stage.

51

Collection of Biometric Data Upon Entry to and Exit From the United States

1651-AB12

Final Rule Stage.

52

Implementation of the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) at U.S. Land Borders—Automation of CBP Form I-94W

1651-AB14

Final Rule Stage.

53

Vetting of Certain Surface Transportation Employees

1652-AA69

Proposed Rule Stage.

54

Amending Vetting Requirements for Employees With Access to a Security Identification Display Area (SIDA)

1652-AA70

Proposed Rule Stage.

55

Flight Training for Aliens and Other Designated Individuals; Security Awareness Training for Flight School Employees

1652-AA35

Final Rule Stage.

56

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport: Enhanced Security Procedures for Certain Operations

1652-AA49

Final Rule Stage.

57

Security Training for Surface Transportation Employees

1652-AA55

Final Rule Stage.

58

Adjusting Program Fees for the Student and Exchange Visitor Program

1653-AA74

Proposed Rule Stage.

59

Apprehension, Processing, Care and Custody of Alien Minors

1653-AA75

Proposed Rule Stage.

60

Practical Training Reform

1653-AA76

Proposed Rule Stage.

61

Factors Considered When Evaluating a Governor's Request for Individual Assistance for a Major Disaster

1660-AA83

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

62

Project Approval for Single Family Condominium (FR-5715)

2502-AJ30

Final Rule Stage.

63

Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2016 (FR-6057)

2577-AD03

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of the Interior

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

64

Rescission of the 2015 BLM Hydraulic Fracturing Rule

1004-AE52

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Justice

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

65

Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program Regulations

1121-AA85

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Labor

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

66

Request for Information Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales and Computer Employees

1235-AA20

Proposed Rule Stage.

67

Apprenticeship Programs, Labor Standards for Registration, Amendment of Regulations

1205-AB85

Proposed Rule Stage.

68

Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses

1218-AD17

Proposed Rule Stage.

69

Occupational Exposure to Beryllium

1218-AB76

Final Rule Stage.

70

Standards Improvement Project IV

1218-AC67

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Transportation

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

71

Pilot Records Database (HR 5900)

2120-AK31

Proposed Rule Stage.

72

Orbital Debris Mitigation Methods for Launch Vehicle Upper Stages (Orbital Debris)

2120-AK81

Proposed Rule Stage.

73

Operations of Small Unmanned Aircraft Over People

2120-AK85

Proposed Rule Stage.

74

Pilot Professional Development

2120-AJ87

Final Rule Stage.

75

Transport Airplane Fuel Tank and System Lightning Protection

2120-AK24

Final Rule Stage.

76

Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft

2120-AK82

Final Rule Stage.

77

Rear Seat Belt Reminder System

2127-AL37

Proposed Rule Stage.

78

Passenger Car and Light Truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards MYs 2022-2025

2127-AL76

Proposed Rule Stage.

79

Passenger Equipment Safety Standards Amendments

2130-AC46

Final Rule Stage.

80

Private Investment Project Procedures

2132-AB27

Proposed Rule Stage.

81

Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans

2132-AB23

Final Rule Stage.

82

Pipeline Safety: Class Location Requirements

2137-AF29

Prerule Stage.

83

Pipeline Safety: Safety of Hazardous Liquid Pipelines

2137-AE66

Final Rule Stage.

84

Pipeline Safety: Gas Transmission

2137-AE72

Final Rule Stage.

85

Hazardous Materials: Oil Spill Response Plans and Information Sharing for High-Hazard Flammable Trains

2137-AF08

Final Rule Stage.

86

Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Safety Provisions for Lithium Batteries Transported by Aircraft

2137-AF20

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

87

Prosthetic and Rehabilitative Items and Services

2900-AP46

Proposed Rule Stage.

88

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V005, Parts 812 and 813)

2900-AP58

Proposed Rule Stage.

89

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V004, Parts 811 and 832)

2900-AP81

Proposed Rule Stage.

90

Beneficiary Travel

2900-AP89

Proposed Rule Stage.

91

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2015-V010)

2900-AQ02

Proposed Rule Stage.

92

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principle (VAAR Case 2016-V002, Parts 829, 846 and 847)

2900-AQ04

Proposed Rule Stage.

93

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principle (VAAR Case 2016-V003, Parts 844 and 845)

2900-AQ05

Proposed Rule Stage.

94

Authority of Health Care Providers to Practice Telehealth

2900-AQ06

Proposed Rule Stage.

95

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V008)

2900-AQ18

Proposed Rule Stage.

96

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V006)

2900-AQ19

Proposed Rule Stage.

97

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2015-V011)

2900-AQ20

Proposed Rule Stage.

98

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2015-V012)

2900-AQ21

Proposed Rule Stage.

99

Per Diem Paid to States for Care of Eligible Veterans in State Homes

2900-AO88

Final Rule Stage.

100

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V001, Parts 803, 814 and 822)

2900-AP50

Final Rule Stage.

101

Revise and Streamline VA Acquisition Regulation to Adhere to Federal Acquisition Regulation Principles (VAAR Case 2014-V002, Parts 816 and 828)

2900-AP82

Final Rule Stage.

102

Reimbursement for Emergency Treatment

2900-AQ08

Final Rule Stage.

Environmental Protection Agency

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

103

State Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Electric Utility Generating Units

2060-AT67

Prerule Stage.

104

Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Reconsideration

2060-AT54

Proposed Rule Stage.

105

Pesticides; Certification of Pesticide Applicators Rule; Reconsideration of the Minimum Age Requirements

2070-AK37

Proposed Rule Stage.

106

Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard; Reconsideration of Several Requirements

2070-AK43

Proposed Rule Stage.

107

Clean Water Act Hazardous Substances Spill Prevention

2050-AG87

Proposed Rule Stage.

108

Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residues From Electric Utilities: Remand Rule

2050-AG88

Proposed Rule Stage.

109

Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air Act; Reconsideration of Amendments

2050-AG95

Proposed Rule Stage.

110

National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper: Regulatory Revisions

2040-AF15

Proposed Rule Stage.

111

Second Action: Definition of 'Waters of the United States'

2040-AF75

Proposed Rule Stage.

112

Renewable Fuel Volume Standards for 2018 and Biomass Based Diesel Volume (BBD) for 2019

2060-AT04

Final Rule Stage.

113

Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

2060-AT55

Final Rule Stage.

114

Financial Responsibility Requirements Under CERCLA Section 108(b) for Classes of Facilities in the Hardrock Mining Industry

2050-AG61

Final Rule Stage.

115

Definition of “Waters of the United States”—Recodification of Pre-existing Rule

2040-AF74

Final Rule Stage.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

116

Federal Sector Equal Employment Opportunity Process

3046-AB00

Proposed Rule Stage.

117

Amendments to Regulations Under the Americans With Disabilities Act

3046-AB10

Proposed Rule Stage.

118

Amendments to Regulations Under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

3046-AB11

Proposed Rule Stage.

Small Business Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

119

SBA Express Loan Program; Export Express Program

3245-AG74

Proposed Rule Stage.

120

Women-Owned Small Business and Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Business—Certification

3245-AG75

Proposed Rule Stage.

121

Office of Women's Business Ownership: Women's Business Center Program

3245-AG02

Final Rule Stage.

Social Security Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

122

Investigative Policies for Organizational Representative Payees

0960-AH79

Prerule Stage.

123

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Musculoskeletal Disorders (3318P)

0960-AG38

Proposed Rule Stage.

124

Update to the Comprehensive Medical Listings—Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Digestive Disorders, Cardiovascular Disorders, and Skin Disorders

0960-AG65

Proposed Rule Stage.

125

Minimum Monthly Withholding Amount for Recovery of Title II Benefit Overpayments (3752P)

0960-AH42

Proposed Rule Stage.

126

Removing Ability to Communicate in English as a Vocational Factor

0960-AH86

Proposed Rule Stage.

127

Use of Electronic Payroll Data To Improve Program Administration

0960-AH88

Proposed Rule Stage.

128

Newer and Stronger Penalties (Conforming Changes)

0960-AH91

Proposed Rule Stage.

129

Privacy Act Exemption: Personnel Security and Suitability Program Files

0960-AH97

Proposed Rule Stage.

130

References to Social Security and Medicare in Electronic Communications

0960-AI04

Proposed Rule Stage.

131

Availability of Information and Records to the Public

0960-AI07

Proposed Rule Stage.

132

Privacy Act Exemption: Social Security Administration Violence and Reporting System (SSAvers)

0960-AI08

Proposed Rule Stage.

133

Redeterminations When There is a Reason To Believe Fraud or Similar Fault Was Involved in an Individual's Application for Benefits

0960-AI10

Proposed Rule Stage.

134

Changes to the Requirements for Claimant Representation

0960-AI22

Proposed Rule Stage.

135

Making Permanent the Attorney Advisor Program

0960-AI23

Final Rule Stage.

DOD/GSA/NASA (FAR)

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking stage

136

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR); FAR Case 2018-002, Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance

9000-AN62

Proposed Rule Stage.

National Indian Gaming Commission

Sequence no.

Title

Regulation

identifier no.

Rulemaking stage

137

Class II Minimum Internal Control Standards

3141-AA60

Proposed Rule Stage.

138

Minimum Internal Control Standards

3141-AA55

Final Rule Stage.

BILLING CODE 6820-27-P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Fall 2017 Statement of Regulatory Priorities

Regulatory reform is one of the cornerstones of the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) strategy for creating a culture of consistent, efficient service to our customers, while reducing burdens and improving efficiency. USDA's regulatory reform efforts, combined with other reform efforts, will make it easier to invest, produce, and build in rural America, which will lead to the creation of jobs and enhanced economic prosperity. To achieve results, USDA is guided by the following comprehensive set of priorities through which the Department, its employees, and external partners will work to identify and eliminate regulatory and administrative barriers and improve business processes to enhance program delivery and reduce burdens on program participants. These priorities include:

Agricultural and Rural Prosperity Task Force:

Executive Order 13790—Promoting Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America established the inter-Departmental Task Force chaired by Secretary Perdue to identify opportunities for the Federal government to work more effectively together for the benefit of rural Americans. The Task Force is examining barriers to economic prosperity in rural America and how innovation, infrastructure, and technology can assist agriculture and help rural communities thrive. The Task Force is examining regulations across the Federal government to identify obsolete, inefficient, or unnecessary regulations that impede economic growth.

Regulatory Reform Task Force (RRTF):

In response to Executive Order 13777—Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda and Executive Order 13771—Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, which set forth expectations for reducing the regulatory burden on the public, the Department has established an internal RRTF to identify outdated regulations for elimination and administrative processes for streamlining. The USDA RRTF is comprised of senior agency managers representing all the major missions of the Department. USDA is also soliciting public comments on recommended reforms through July 2018.

Farm Bill Reform:

As the 2014 Farm Bill will soon expire, the Department is evaluating past practices to identify opportunities for policy and technical improvements, and to make research available so Congress can make facts-based, data-driven decisions to ensure a robust agricultural economy and increased opportunities in rural areas. Reauthorization of the Farm Bill provides an opportunity to introduce program reforms to eliminate obsolete and underperforming programs, simplify the administration of programs, and improve program outcomes.

Organizational Reform:

To ensure that USDA's programs, agencies, and offices best serve the Department's customers, USDA is implementing organizational changes that are targeted at improving customer service. Through these reforms, USDA is breaking down organizational barriers that have impeded the Department's ability to most effectively and efficiently support its customers across the Nation and around the world. Examples of the organizational reforms include the establishment of an Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs to ensure that American agriculture benefits from new and expanded trade opportunities and the consolidation of administrative functions at the mission area level to eliminate inefficiencies.

These reforms and strategies allow the Department to best support the needs of its customers. Through the implementation of these improvements, USDA will be better positioned to remove obstacles, and give agricultural

producers every opportunity to prosper and feed a growing world population. These improvements support the accomplishment of USDA's mission to provide leadership on agriculture, food, natural resources, rural prosperity, nutrition, and related issues through fact-based, data-driven, and customer-focused decisions.

The Department's fall 2017 Statement of Regulatory Priorities reflects the Administration's commitment to regulatory reform and USDA's rigorous implementation of Executive Orders 13777 and 13771.

Executive Order 13777

Executive Order 13777 establishes a Federal policy to lower regulatory burdens on the American people by implementing and enforcing regulatory reform. The RRTF reviewed proposed, pending and existing regulations to determine the deregulatory and regulatory actions to include in the 2017 fall Regulatory Agenda. The RRTF identified over 270 reform initiatives, including 101 deregulatory actions that will save the public from unnecessary regulatory burdens. These actions were further evaluated to determine which ones should be made a priority based on the impact of the proposals and the ability to complete the action in FY 2018.

Executive Order 13777 also directed the Department to seek input from entities significantly affected by Federal regulations. To satisfy this requirement, the Department published a Request for Information (RFI) in the

Federal Register

on July 17, 2017, seeking public input on identifying regulatory reform initiatives (82 FR 32649). The RFI asked the public to identify regulations, guidance documents, or any other policy documents or administrative processes that need reform, as well as ideas on how to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal such items. While comments to the notice do not bind USDA to any further actions, all submissions will be reviewed and will significantly inform actions to repeal, replace, or modify existing regulations.

Executive Order 13771

Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to eliminate two existing regulations for every new regulation while limiting the total costs associated with an agency's regulations. Specifically, it requires a regulatory two-for-one wherein an agency must propose the elimination of two existing regulations for every new regulation it publishes. Moreover, the costs associated with the new regulation must be completely offset by cost savings brought about by deregulation.

The Department's 2017 fall Regulatory Agenda reflects the Department's commitment to regulatory reform and continues USDA's rigorous implementation of Executive Order 13771. The regulatory agenda identifies 76 rules, of which 44 rules are deregulatory. The remaining 32 rules are not subject to the offsetting or deregulatory requirements of Executive Order 13771. Of the total number of deregulatory actions, USDA has identified 29 final rules that will be completed in FY 2018 and will result in a cost savings. Although we have not estimated the savings for 26 of these actions, they are considered deregulatory actions that USDA will implement to meet the direction that an agency issues twice as many Executive Order 13771 deregulatory actions as new Executive Order 13771 regulatory actions.

USDA's 2017 fall Statement of Regulatory Priorities was developed to lower regulatory burdens on the American people by implementing and enforcing regulatory reform. These regulatory priorities will contribute to the mission of the Department, the achievement of the long-term goals the Department aims to accomplish. Highlights of how the Department's regulatory reform efforts contribute to the accomplishment of the Department's strategic goals include the following:

A primary goal of the Department is to ensure that programs are delivered efficiently, effectively, with integrity, and a focus on customer service: To achieve this, USDA is working to leverage the strength and talent of USDA employees with continued dedication to data-driven enterprise solutions through collaborative governance and human capital management strategies centered on accountability and professional development. USDA will reduce regulatory and administrative burdens hindering agencies from reaching the greatest number of stakeholders. Improved customer service and employee engagement within USDA will create a more effective and accessible organization for all stakeholders.

Streamline and expand public engagement in the development and modification of national forest management policies:

This final rule will provide greater opportunity for public participation in the formulation of standards, criteria and guidelines applicable to Forest Service programs by: (1) Expanding the scope of documents subject to such review; (2) utilizing technologies that were not available when these regulations were last amended in 1984 to ensure a broader swath of the interested public is notified of opportunities to review and comment on policy changes; and (3) increasing the efficiency of the directive revision process to reduce administrative costs and permit more frequent and timely updates. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0596-AC65.

Streamline National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing procedures:

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Forest Service are adjusting procedures that set out the NEPA implementing procedures for each agency based on accumulated experience of the agencies. APHIS will issue a proposed rule to incorporate scientific data accumulated since 1995 on the environmental impact of covered actions, clarify categories of action for which APHIS would normally complete an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment for an action, expand the list of actions subject to categorical exclusion from further environmental documentation, and set out an environmental documentation process for use in emergencies. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AC60. The Forest Service will publish a proposed rule to eliminate outdated requirements and revise aspects of the analysis framework, scoping and public engagement, and determining significance. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0596-AD31.

Establish de minimis

exemptions for applying for animal licenses and renewals under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA):

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will issue a final rule to exempt entities with a small number of animals from the requirement to obtain an AWA license. This action will reduce regulatory burden on small entities while also allowing APHIS to target enforcement efforts where they are most needed. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AD99. Coupled with this

de minimis

rule, APHIS is considering a proposed rule that would promote compliance with the AWA by (1) reducing licensing fees and (2) strengthening existing safeguards that prevent an individual whose license has been suspended or revoked, or who has a history of noncompliance, from obtaining a license or working with regulated animals. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AE35

Establish de minimis

levels for enforcing Lacey Act requirements:

The

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 amended the Lacey Act to provide, among other things, that importers submit a declaration at the time of importation for certain plants and plant products. The declaration requirements of the Lacey Act became effective on December 15, 2008, and enforcement of those requirements is being phased in. APHIS will propose an exception to the declaration requirements for products containing composite plant materials, and establish an exception to the declaration requirement for products containing a minimal amount of plant materials. Both actions would relieve the burden on importers, while continuing to ensure that the declaration requirement fulfills the purposes of the Lacey Act. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AD44.

Reduce the time it takes to issue housing loans.

The Housing Opportunity through Modernization Act of 2016 permits the Secretary to delegate authority to approve and execute single family housing loan guarantees directly to preferred lenders, those lenders whose loans have performed well and who have demonstrated strong underwriting capability. To take advantage of this authority, the Rural Housing Service (RHS) will propose to delegate loan approval authority to preferred lenders participating in the Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program. Preferred lenders would be responsible for certifying that both the applicant and property meet all program requirements and eligible for the guarantee. The revisions are expected to shorten the loan approval and processing time by up to 12 days. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0575-AD08

The Department is making it a priority to maximize the ability of American agricultural producers to prosper by feeding and clothing the world: A strong and prosperous agricultural sector is essential to the well-being of the overall U.S. economy. America's farmers and ranchers ensure a safe and reliable food and fuel supply and support job growth and economic development. To maintain a strong agricultural economy, USDA will support farmers in starting and maintaining profitable farm and ranch businesses, as well as offer support to producers affected by natural disasters. The Department will continue to work to create new markets and support a competitive agricultural system by reducing barriers that inhibit agricultural opportunities and economic growth.

Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Regarding the Introduction of Certain Genetically Engineered Organisms:

APHIS withdrew its proposed rule to revise the Department's biotechnology regulations and will re-engage with stakeholders to determine the most effective, science-based approach for regulating the products of modern biotechnology while protecting plant health. APHIS issued the proposed rule on January 19, 2017, and received 208 public comments. APHIS will maintain and follow current biotechnology regulations for safely handling the importation, interstate movement, and environmental release of genetically engineered organisms as we re-engage with stakeholders to determine the most effective approach for regulating these products. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AE15.

Implement the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard:

This action is mandated by the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (Law), which requires USDA to develop a national standard and the procedures for its implementation within two years of the Law's enactment. Pursuant to the law, AMS will propose requirements that, if finalized, will serve as a national mandatory bioengineered food disclosure standard for bioengineered food and food that may be bioengineered. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0581-AD54.

Withdrawal of the Scope of Sections 202(a) and (b) of the Packers and Stockyards Act (Act) interim final rule:

On December 20, 2016, the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) published an interim rule addressing the scope of sections 202(a) and (b) of the Act, which enumerate unlawful practices under the Act. The interim final rule was originally scheduled to become effective on February 21, 2017. The effective date of the final rule was delayed twice until October 19, 2017. On April 12, 2017, GIPSA published a proposed rule requesting comments whether the final rule should be allowed to go into effect. On October 18, 2017, GIPSA published a final rule withdrawing the December 20, 2016, interim final rule, ending the regulatory action. The interim final rule was found to conflict with case law in several U.S. Court of Appeals Circuits, which Congress has declined to overturn through legislation. Additionally, the interim final rule was improperly issued without adequate notice and opportunity for comment. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0580-AB28.

Re-evaluate the Organic Livestock and Poultry Program final rule:

Because of significant policy and legal issues within the final rule (0581-AD44), the public was asked to comment on which of the following four actions they believed would be best for USDA to take with regard to the disposition of the final rule (0581-AD44). The options were: Let the rule become effective on November 14, 2017; Suspend the rule indefinitely; Delay the effective date of the rule further, beyond the effective date of November 14, 2017; Withdraw the rule so that USDA would not pursue implementation of the rule. Comments were received on all four options. Based on the content of the comments received and the evaluation those comments generated, the option to delay the effective date further was chosen. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0581-AD74. USDA plans to propose the final disposition of 0581-AD44 in December 2017. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0581-AD75.

Updating plant pest regulations:

APHIS is planning to update regulations regarding the movement of plant pests to establish criteria governing the movement and environmental release of biological control organisms, and to establish regulations allowing the importation and movement in interstate commerce of certain types of plant pests without restriction by granting exceptions from permitting requirements for those pests. These updates would include the movement of soil. This action would clarify the factors that would be considered when assessing the risks associated with the movement of certain organisms and facilitates the movement of regulated organisms and articles in a manner that also protects U.S. agriculture. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AC98.

Establishing a performance standard for authorizing the importation and interstate movement of fruits and vegetables:

APHIS would broaden the existing performance standard to provide for consideration of all new fruits and vegetables for importation into the United States using a notice-based process rather than through proposed and final rules. Likewise, APHIS would propose an equivalent revision of the performance standard governing the interstate movements of fruits and vegetables from Hawaii and the U.S. territories (Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) and the removal of commodity-specific phytosanitary requirements from those regulations. This action will allow for the consideration of requests to authorize the importation or interstate movement of new fruits and vegetables

in a manner that enables a more flexible and responsive regulatory approach to evolving pest situations in both the United States and exporting countries. It will not, however, alter the science-based process in which the risk associated with importation or interstate movement of a given fruit or vegetable is evaluated or the manner in which risks associated with the importation or interstate movement of a fruit or vegetable are mitigated. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0579-AD71.

Providing all Americans access to a safe, nutritious, and secure food supply is USDA's most important responsibility, and it is one undertaken with great seriousness. USDA has critical roles in preventing foodborne illness and protecting public health, while ensuring Americans have access to food and healthful diet. The Department will continue to prevent contamination and limit foodborne illness by expanding its modernization of food inspection systems, and USDA's research, education, and extension programs will continue to provide information, tools, and technologies about the causes of foodborne illness and its prevention. USDA will continue to develop partnerships that support best practices in implementing effective nutrition assistance programs that ensure eligible populations have access to programs that support their food needs.

Increase flexibilities provided to school lunch program operators in meeting nutrition requirements:

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) plans to issue an interim final rule that provides flexibilities consistent with those currently available to Program operators participating in the Child Nutrition Programs beginning in School Year 2018-2019. These flexibilities include: (1) Providing operators the option to offer flavored, low-fat (1 percent fat) milk in the Child Nutrition Programs; (2) extending the State agencies' option to allow individual school food authorities to include grains that are not whole grain-rich in the weekly menu offered under the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP); and (3) revising the sodium reduction timeline for the NSLP and SBP. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0584-AE53.

Improve effectiveness and efficiency of moving individuals into work:

The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (FNA) establishes a time limit for participation in SNAP of three months in three years for able-bodied adults without children who are not working. FNA allows states to waive the time limit under certain circumstances. FNS would request public input on a proposed framework for modifying ABAWD time-limit waivers with the goal of moving individuals to work as the best solution for poverty, and to advance this goal consistent with the structure and the intent of the act. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0584-AE57.

Provide regulatory flexibility for retailers in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP):

FNS will issue a proposed rule to modify the definition of the term “variety” as it pertains to the stocking requirements for certain SNAP authorized retail food stores to increase the number of items that qualify as acceptable varieties in the four staple food categories, meat, poultry, fish, and dairy products. This proposed change will provide retailers with more flexibility in meeting the enhanced SNAP eligibility requirements of the 2016 final rule and meet the requirements expressed in the Consolidated Appropriation Act of 2017. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0584-AE61.

Reduce the reporting burden for nutrition program operators:

FNS will withdraw the interim final rule provisions of the SNAP: Certification, Eligibility, and Employment and Training Provisions of the Food, Energy and Conservation Act of 2008 rule published on January 6, 2017. The interim final rule portion increased requirements for Group Living Arrangements and Drug and Alcohol Treatment Centers. Comments received on these changes indicated that the regulatory change presented significant technical and administrative challenges. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0584-AE54.

Modernize swine slaughter inspection:

The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is proposing to establish a voluntary New Swine Inspection System (NSIS) for market-hog slaughter establishments, and mandatory provisions for all swine slaughtering establishments (

i.e.,

including those that also slaughter roaster swine, sows, and boars). NSIS will provide for increased offline inspection activities that are more directly related to food safety resulting in greater compliance with sanitation and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulations and reduce the risk of foodborne illness. NSIS would also provide incentives to establishments to improve their processing methods and to develop more efficient slaughter and dressing technologies. Additionally, FSIS is considering requiring establishments to implement written sanitary dressing plans to prevent contamination of carcasses throughout the slaughter and dressing operation; modernizing process control sampling programs; and sampling the slaughter environment for microbiological contamination. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0583-AD62.

Modernize egg products inspection:

FSIS is proposing to replace current regulations with HACCP Systems and Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), consistent with HACCP and Sanitation SOP requirements in the meat and poultry products inspection regulations. In addition, FSIS is proposing to remove the current requirements for prior approval by FSIS of egg products plant drawings, specifications, and equipment prior to their use in official plants, provide for the generic labeling of egg products, and require safe handling labels on shell eggs and egg products. The agency is also proposing to move from continuous inspection to daily inspection of establishments. For more information about this rule, see RIN 0583-AC58.

USDA—AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE (AMS)

Proposed Rule Stage

1. National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Other.

Legal Authority:

Pub. L. 114-216; 7 U.S.C. 1621 to 1627

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 1285.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

On July 29, 2016, the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 was amended to establish a National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (Law) (Pub. L. 114-216). Pursuant to the law, this NPRM will propose requirements that, if finalized, will serve as a national mandatory bioengineered food disclosure standard for bioengineered food and food that may be bioengineered.

Statement of Need:

This action is mandated by Public Law 114-216.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The authority for this action is provided by the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 as amended by Public Law 114-216.

Alternatives:

The alternatives will be identified during the drafting stage and the public will be given the opportunity to comment on alternatives.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

This rule will fulfill the mandate of Public

Law 114-216. The specific costs and benefits will be determined during the drafting of the proposed rule. AMS is striving to fulfill the mandate while minimizing the burden on the regulated community.

Risks:

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

12/00/17

Final Action

07/00/18

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal.

Federalism:

This action may have federalism implications as defined in E.O. 13132.

Agency Contact:

Arthur Neal, Deputy Administrator, Transportation and Marketing, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service,

Phone:

202 692-1300.

RIN:

0581-AD54

USDA—AMS

2. • NOP: Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices

Priority:

Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Other.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501 to 6522

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

The Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule, published on January 19, 2017, adds provisions to the USDA organic regulations to address livestock and poultry living conditions, health care practices, and animal handling and transport, and during slaughter. The final rule was originally scheduled to become effective on March 20, 2017; the effective date was subsequently delayed to May 19, 2017. AMS published a notice further delaying the effective date to November 14, 2017. Per a document published on November 14, 2017, the January 2017 rule was further delayed to May 14, 2018. As stated within the November 2017 publication, this proposed rule requests public comments on: (1) The scope of the Secretary's authority under of the Organic Foods Production Act including 7 U.S.C. 6509; (2) whether the requirements in the final rule are the most innovative and least burdensome tool for meeting regulatory objectives; and, (3) whether the revised benefits calculations, which corrected a mathematical error in the final rule, justify the estimated costs.

Statement of Need:

This action is needed to ensure only regulations that are properly supported by legislative authority and requirements of executive orders are met.

Summary of Legal Basis:

AMS National Organic Program is authorized by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) to establish national standards governing the marketing of organically produced agricultural products (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522). The USDA organic regulations set the requirements for the organic certification of agricultural products (7 CFR part 205).

Alternatives:

As AMS evaluates the concerns outlined in the abstract, the possible outcomes of the evaluation range from allowing the January 2017 final rule to become effective to withdrawing the January 2017 final rule.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

AMS estimated that the discounted costs, transfers, and benefits of the January 2017 final rule, for three different producer response scenarios, would range from $8.2 to $31 million annually due to increased compliance and regulatory burdens. In addition, there is also an estimated $3.9 million undiscounted annual paperwork burden. AMS also estimated transfers ranging from $80 to $86 million annually caused by producers exiting the organic market. AMS estimates the benefits would range from $3.3 to $31.6 million for all producer response scenarios when the mathematical error is corrected.

Risks:

This action is likely to be contentious.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

12/00/17

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

International Impacts:

This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.

Agency Contact:

Jennifer Tucker, Associate Deputy Administrator, USDA National Organic Program, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone:

202 720-3252.

Related RIN:

Related to 0581-AD44, Related to 0581-AD74

RIN:

0581-AD75

USDA—ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE (APHIS)

Proposed Rule Stage

3. Lacey Act Implementation Plan: De Minimis Exception and Composite Articles

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

16 U.S.C. 3371

et seq.

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 357.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 amended the Lacey Act to provide, among other things, that importers submit a declaration at the time of importation for certain plants and plant products. The declaration requirements of the Lacey Act became effective on December 15, 2008, and enforcement of those requirements is being phased in. We are proposing an exception to the declaration requirements for products containing composite plant materials. We are also proposing to establish an exception to the declaration requirement for products containing a minimal amount of plant materials. Both of these actions would relieve the burden on importers while continuing to ensure that the declaration requirement fulfills the purposes of the Lacey Act.

Statement of Need:

Will update.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Will update.

Alternatives:

Will update.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Will update.

Risks:

Will update.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

ANPRM

06/30/11

76 FR 38330

ANPRM Comment Period End

08/29/11

NPRM

12/00/17

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

International Impacts:

This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Parul Patel, Senior Agriculturalist, Permitting and Compliance Coordination, PPQ, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 60, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231,

Phone:

301 851-2351.

RIN:

0579-AD44

USDA—APHIS

Final Rule Stage

4. National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

42 U.S.C. 4321

et seq.

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 372.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

We are amending the regulations that set out our National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing procedures. The amendments will clarify when we will complete an environmental impact statement or an environmental analysis for an action, provide additional categories of actions for which we will prepare such documents, expand the list of actions subject to categorical exclusion from further environmental documentation, and set out an environmental documentation process that could be used in emergencies. The changes are intended to update the regulations and improve their clarity and effectiveness.

Statement of Need:

APHIS' NEPA regulations were last amended in 1995. The Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing NEPA at 40 CFR 1507.3(a) indicate that agencies “shall continue to review their policies and procedures and in consultation with the Council to revise them as necessary to ensure full compliance with the purposes and provisions of the Act.” Accordingly, we have evaluated our regulations and identified changes that would clarify the regulations, make them more consistent with NEPA, and allow us greater flexibility in fulfilling the requirements of NEPA and CEQ's NEPA implementing regulations while responding to immediate disease and pest threats or damage to the environment.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321

et seq.

), is the United States' basic charter for protection of the environment. Consistent with NEPA and with the requirements of CEQ's NEPA implementing regulations, APHIS' NEPA regulations provide guidance, sources of information and assistance, definitions, classifications of action, identification of major planning and decision points, opportunities for public involvement, and methods of processing different types of environmental documents.

Alternatives:

Leaving the regulations unchanged would be unsatisfactory because it would perpetuate the current situation;

i.e.,

one in which the current regulations, last amended in 1995, are outdated and in need of clarification. Another alternative would be to establish criteria for categorical exclusion that are less (or more) restrictive, thus increasing (or decreasing) the number of actions eligible for categorical exclusion.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

APHIS has determined that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Some entities will experience time and money savings, but the savings should benefit only a few entities each year. The proposal would also serve to clarify the regulations and make the NEPA process more transparent, which, although beneficial, should not have a significant economic impact on affected entities.

Risks:

Not Applicable.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

07/20/16

81 FR 47051

NPRM Comment Period End

09/19/16

Final Rule

03/00/18

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Eileen Sutker, APHIS Federal NEPA Contact, Environmental and Risk Analysis Services, PPD, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 149, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238,

Phone:

301 851-3043.

RIN:

0579-AC60

USDA—APHIS

5. Animal Welfare; Establishing De Minimis Exemptions From Licensing

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 2131 to 2159

CFR Citation:

9 CFR 1 to 3.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

In the 2014 Farm Bill, Congress amended the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) to provide the Secretary of Agriculture with the authority to determine what facilities and activities involving AWA regulated animals are de minimis and therefore exempt from licensure and oversight. We are amending the AWA regulations to enact this new provision. This change provides APHIS with the flexibility to exempt from licensing those dealers and exhibitors who provide adequate levels of humane care to their animals, allowing us to target our enforcement resources where they are most needed. Dealers and exhibitors operating at or below the threshold will be exempted from APHIS licensing and oversight under the AWA.

Statement of Need:

A 2014 Farm Bill amendment to the Animal Welfare Act provides the Secretary of Agriculture with the authority to determine when animal dealers and exhibitors are not required to obtain a license under the Act, if the size of the business conducting AWA-related activities is determined by the Secretary to be de minimis. This rule is necessary to establish the thresholds for what constitutes a de minimis level of activity.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The Agricultural Act of 2014 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 113-79), section 12308, which amended section 3 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2133).

Alternatives:

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

By the very nature of this proposal, all entities that would be affected are considered small. The entities most likely to be affected by this proposal are businesses engaged in AWA-related exhibition activities that have small numbers of regulated animals. This proposed rule would relieve regulatory responsibilities for some currently licensed entities and reduce the cost of business for those entities. Those currently licensed exhibitors, breeders, and dealers who are under the proposed de minimis thresholds would no longer be subject to licensing, animal identification and recordkeeping requirements.

Risks:

Establishing de minimis thresholds in this proposal would allow APHIS to direct inspection and enforcement efforts on higher risk entities.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

08/04/16

81 FR 51386

NPRM Comment Period End

11/02/16

Final Rule

02/00/18

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Kay Carter-Corker, Director, National Policy Staff, Animal

Care, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737,

Phone:

301 851-3748.

RIN:

0579-AD99

USDA—FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE (FNS)

Final Rule Stage

6. Child Nutrition Programs: Flexibilities for Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium Requirements

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

42 U.S.C. 1758; 42 U.S.C. 1766; 42 U.S.C. 1772; 42 U.S.C. 1773; 42 U.S.C. 1779

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 210.10; 7 CFR 210.11; 7 CFR 215.7a; 7 CFR 220.8; 7 CFR 226.20.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This interim final rule provides flexibilities consistent with those currently available by Congressional directive to program operators participating in the Child Nutrition Programs for School Year 2018-2019. These flexibilities include: (1) Providing operators the option to offer flavored, low-fat (one percent fat) milk in the Child Nutrition Programs; (2) extending the State agencies' option to allow individual school food authorities to include grains that are not whole grain-rich in the weekly menu offered under the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP); and (3) revising the sodium reduction timeline for the NSLP and SBP.

Statement of Need:

Will update.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Will update.

Alternatives:

Will update.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Will update.

Risks:

Will update.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

Interim Final Rule

11/30/17

82 FR 56703

Interim Final Rule Comment Period End

01/29/18

Interim Final Rule Effective

07/01/18

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Additional Information:

School Lunch—NSLA Section 9(a)(1)—42 U.S.C. 1758(a)(1). Child and Adult Care Food Program—NSLA Section 17(g)—42 U.S.C. 1766(g) Special Milk Program—Child Nutrition Act Section 3(a)(1)—42 U.S.C. 1772(a)(1). School Breakfast Program—Child Nutrition Act Section 4(e)(1)(A)—42 U.S.C. 1773(e)(1)(A). Smart Snacks in Schools—Child Nutrition Act Section 10(b)—42 U.S.C. 1779(b).

Agency Contact:

Charles H. Watford, Regulatory Review Specialist, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302,

Phone:

703 605-0800,

Email: charles.watford@fns.usda.gov.

RIN:

0584-AE53

USDA—FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE (FSIS)

Proposed Rule Stage

7. Modernization of Swine Slaughter Inspection

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

21 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

CFR Citation:

9 CFR 301, 309, 310, and 314.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is proposing to amend the Federal meat inspection regulations to establish a new inspection system for swine slaughter establishments demonstrated to provide greater public health protection than the existing inspection system. The Agency is also proposing several changes to the regulations that would affect all establishments that slaughter swine, regardless of the inspection system under which they operate.

Statement of Need:

The proposed action is necessary to improve food safety, improve compliance with the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, improve the effectiveness of market hog slaughter inspection, make better use of the Agency's resources, and remove unnecessary regulatory obstacles to innovation.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Alternatives:

The Agency is considering alternatives such as: (1) A mandatory New Swine Slaughter Inspection System (NSIS) for market hog slaughter establishments and (2) a voluntary NSIS for market hog establishments, under which FSIS would conduct the same offline inspection activities as traditional inspection.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

The proposed regulations are expected to benefit establishments by removing unnecessary regulatory obstacles to innovation and allowing establishments more flexibility in line configuration. The proposed changes are also expected to reduce establishments' sampling costs. Additionally, the proposed regulations are expected to improve the effectiveness of market hog slaughter inspection, leading to a reduction in the number of human illnesses attributed to products derived from market hogs. The proposed actions make better use of the Agency's resources, which is expected to reduce the Agency's personnel and training budgetary requirements. Establishments are expected to incur increased labor and recordkeeping costs.

Risks:

None.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

11/00/17

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Agency Contact:

Matthew Michael, Director, Issuances Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Office of Policy and Program Development, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-3700,

Phone:

202 720-0345,

Fax:

202 690-0486,

Email: matthew.michael@fsis.usda.gov.

RIN:

0583-AD62

USDA—FOREST SERVICE (FS)

Final Rule Stage

8. Administrative Issuances; Involving the Public in the Formulation of Forest Service Directives (Rule)

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Deregulatory.

Legal Authority:

16 U.S.C. 1612(a)

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 2.7; 36 CFR 200.4; 36 CFR 216.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This procedural final rule will provide greater opportunity for public participation in the formulation of standards, criteria and guidelines applicable to Forest Service programs by: (1) Expanding the scope of documents subject to such review; (2) utilizing technologies that were not available when these regulations were last amended in 1984 to ensure a broader swath of the interested public is notified of opportunities to review and comment on policy changes; and (3) increasing the efficiency of the directive revision process to reduce administrative costs and permit more frequent and timely updates. Consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), this rule is issued as a final rule as it imposes no additional burdens on any governmental

entity or the public but expands the ability of such parties to comment upon the issuance of Agency policies set forth in Forest Service rules and guidance.

Statement of Need:

Will update.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Will update.

Alternatives:

Will update.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Will update.

Risks:

Will update.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

Final Rule

01/00/18

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Small Entities Affected:

No.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Agency Contact:

Michael Migliori, Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone:

202 205-2496,

Email: mmigliori@fs.fed.us.

RIN:

0596-AC65

BILLING CODE: 3410-90-P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (DOC)

Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities

Established in 1903, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) is one of the oldest Cabinet-level agencies in the Federal Government. Commerce's mission is to create the conditions for economic growth and opportunity by promoting innovation, entrepreneurship, competitiveness, and environmental stewardship. Commerce has 12 operating units, which are responsible for managing a diverse portfolio of programs and services, ranging from trade promotion and economic development assistance to broadband and the National Weather Service.

Commerce touches Americans daily, in many ways—making possible the daily weather reports and survey research; facilitating technology that all of us use in the workplace and in the home each day; supporting the development, gathering, and transmission of information essential to competitive business; enabling the diversity of companies and goods found in America's and the world's marketplace; and supporting environmental and economic health for the communities in which Americans live.

Commerce has a clear and compelling vision for itself, for its role in the Federal Government, and for its roles supporting the American people, now and in the future. To achieve this vision, Commerce works in partnership with businesses, universities, communities, and workers to:

1. Innovate by creating new ideas through cutting-edge science and technology from advances in nanotechnology, to ocean exploration, to broadband deployment, and by protecting American innovations through the patent and trademark system;

2. Support entrepreneurship and commercialization by enabling community development and strengthening minority businesses and small manufacturers;

3. Maintain U.S. economic competitiveness in the global marketplace by promoting exports, ensuring a level playing field for U.S. businesses, advancing free, fair, and reciprocal trade, and ensuring that technology transfer is consistent with our nation's economic and security interests;

4. Provide effective management and stewardship of our nation's resources and assets to ensure sustainable economic opportunities; and

5. Make informed policy decisions and enable better understanding of the economy by providing accurate economic and demographic data.

Commerce is a vital resource base, tireless advocate, and Cabinet-level voice for job creation. This Regulatory Plan tracks the most important regulations that implement these policy and program priorities, as well as new efforts by the Department to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens on external stakeholders.

Responding to the Administration's Regulatory Philosophy and Principles

The vast majority of the Commerce's programs and activities do not involve regulation. Of Commerce's 12 primary operating units, only the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will be planning actions that are considered the “most important” significant pre-regulatory or regulatory actions for FY 2018. During the next year, NOAA plans to publish five rulemaking actions that are designated as Regulatory Plan actions. The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) may also publish rulemaking actions designated as Regulatory Plan actions. Further information on these actions is provided below.

Commerce has a long-standing policy to prohibit the issuance of any regulation that discriminates on the basis of race, religion, gender, or any other suspect category and requires that all regulations be written so as to be understandable to those affected by them. The Secretary also requires that Commerce afford the public the maximum possible opportunity to participate in Departmental rulemakings, even where public participation is not required by law.

Commerce has implemented Executive Order 13771 working through its Regulatory Reform Task Force established under Executive Order 13777 to identify and prioritize deregulatory actions that each bureau within the Department can take to reduce and remove regulatory burdens on stakeholders.

In Fiscal Year 2018, Commerce expects to publish approximately 2 regulatory actions and over 30 deregulatory actions, far exceeding the requirement under Executive Order 13771 to publish two deregulatory actions for every one regulatory action. Additionally, Commerce's Regulatory Reform Task Force will continue working to execute directives under Executive Orders 13783 and 13807 to streamline regulatory process and permitting reviews for new energy and infrastructure projects. To that end, Commerce may have other deregulatory actions to implement that do not currently appear in the agenda.

Regulatory reform and agency streamlining are key elements to Commerce's agenda for the next year. Senior policy analysis, performance measurements, and employee evaluations will incorporate these priorities as the Department continues to regulate private industry through multiple bureaus within the agency.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOAA establishes and administers Federal policy for the conservation and management of the Nation's oceanic, coastal, and atmospheric resources. It provides a variety of essential environmental and climate services vital to public safety and to the Nation's economy, such as weather forecasts, drought forecasts, and storm warnings. It is a source of objective information on the state of the environment. NOAA plays the lead role in achieving Commerce's goal of promoting stewardship by providing assessments of the global environment.

Recognizing that economic growth must go hand-in-hand with environmental stewardship, Commerce, through NOAA, conducts programs designed to provide a better understanding of the connections between environmental health, economics, and national security.

Commerce's emphasis on “sustainable fisheries” is designed to boost long-term economic growth in a vital sector of the U.S. economy while conserving the resources in the public trust and minimizing any economic dislocation necessary to ensure long-term economic growth. Commerce is where business and environmental interests intersect, and the classic debate on the use of natural resources is transformed into a “win-win” situation for the environment and the economy.

Three of NOAA's major components, the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS), the National Ocean Service (NOS), and the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), exercise regulatory authority.

NMFS oversees the management and conservation of the Nation's marine fisheries, protects threatened and endangered marine and anadromous species and marine mammals, and promotes economic development of the U.S. fishing industry. NOS assists the coastal States in their management of land and ocean resources in their coastal zones, including estuarine research reserves; manages the national marine sanctuaries; monitors marine pollution; and directs the national program for deep-seabed minerals and ocean thermal energy. NESDIS administers the civilian weather satellite program and licenses private organizations to operate commercial land-remote sensing satellite systems.

Commerce, through NOAA, has a unique role in promoting stewardship of the global environment through effective management of the Nation's marine and coastal resources and in monitoring and predicting changes in the Earth's environment, thus linking trade, development, and technology with environmental issues. NOAA has the primary Federal responsibility for providing sound scientific observations, assessments, and forecasts of environmental phenomena on which resource management, adaptation, and other societal decisions can be made.

In the environmental stewardship area, NOAA's goals include: Rebuilding and maintaining strong U.S. fisheries by using market-based tools and ecosystem approaches to management; conserving, protecting, and recovering threatened and endangered marine and anadromous species and marine mammals while still allowing for economic and recreational opportunities; promoting healthy coastal ecosystems by ensuring that economic development is managed in ways that maintain biodiversity and long-term productivity for sustained use; and modernizing navigation and positioning services. In the environmental assessment and prediction area, goals include: Understanding the impacts of a changing climate and communicating that understanding to government and private sector stakeholders enabling them to adapt; continually improving the National Weather Service; implementing reliable seasonal and interannual climate forecasts to guide economic planning; providing science-based policy advice on options to deal with very long-term (decadal to centennial) changes in the environment; and advancing and improving short-term warning and forecast services for the entire environment.

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) rulemakings concern the conservation and management of fishery resources in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (generally 3-200 nautical miles). Among the several hundred rulemakings that NOAA plans to issue in FY 2018, a number of the regulatory and deregulatory actions will be significant. The exact number of such rulemakings is unknown, since they are usually initiated by the actions of eight regional Fishery Management Councils (FMCs) that are responsible for preparing fishery management plans (FMPs) and FMP amendments, and for drafting implementing regulations for each managed fishery. NOAA issues regulations to implement FMPs and FMP amendments. Once a rulemaking is triggered by an FMC, the Magnuson-Stevens Act places stringent deadlines upon NOAA by which it must exercise its rulemaking responsibilities. FMPs and FMP amendments for Atlantic highly migratory species, such as bluefin tuna, swordfish, and sharks, are developed directly by NOAA, not by FMCs.

FMPs address a variety of issues including maximizing fishing opportunities on healthy stocks, rebuilding overfished stocks, and addressing gear conflicts. One of the problems that FMPs may address is preventing overcapitalization (preventing excess fishing capacity) of fisheries. This may be resolved by market-based systems such as catch shares, which permit shareholders to harvest a quantity of fish and which can be traded on the open market. Harvest limits based on the best available scientific information, whether as a total fishing limit for a species in a fishery or as a share assigned to each vessel participant, enable stressed stocks to rebuild. Other measures include staggering fishing seasons or limiting gear types to avoid gear conflicts on the fishing grounds and establishing seasonal and area closures to protect fishery stocks.

The FMCs provide a forum for public debate and, using the best scientific information available, make the judgments needed to determine optimum yield on a fishery-by-fishery basis. Optional management measures are examined and selected in accordance with the national standards set forth in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This process, including the selection of the preferred management measures, constitutes the development, in simplified form, of an FMP. The FMP, together with draft implementing regulations and supporting documentation, is submitted to NMFS for review against the national standards set forth in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, in other provisions of the Act, and other applicable laws. The same process applies to amending an existing approved FMP.

Marine Mammal Protection Act

The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA) provides the authority for the conservation and management of marine mammals under U.S. jurisdiction. It expressly prohibits, with certain exceptions, the take of marine mammals. The MMPA allows, upon request, the incidental take of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (

e.g.,

oil and gas development, pile driving) within a specified geographic region. NMFS authorizes incidental take under the MMPA if we find that the taking would be of small numbers, have no more than a “negligible impact” on those marine mammal species or stock, and would not have an “unmitigable adverse impact” on the availability of the species or stock for “subsistence” uses. NMFS also initiates rulemakings under the MMPA to establish a management regime to reduce marine mammal mortalities and injuries as a result of interactions with fisheries. In addition, the MMPA allows NMFS to permit the collection of wild animals for scientific research or public display or to enhance the survival of a species or stock, and established the Marine Mammal Commission, which makes recommendations to the Secretaries of the Departments of Commerce and the Interior and other Federal officials on protecting and conserving marine mammals. The Act underwent significant changes in 1994 to allow for takings incidental to commercial fishing

operations, to provide certain exemptions for subsistence and scientific uses, and to require the preparation of stock assessments for all marine mammal stocks in waters under U.S. jurisdiction.

Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) provides for the conservation of species that are determined to be “endangered” or “threatened,” and the conservation of the ecosystems on which these species depend. The ESA authorizes both NMFS and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to jointly administer the provisions of the ESA. NMFS manages marine and “anadromous” species, and FWS manages land and freshwater species. Together, NMFS and FWS work to protect critically imperiled species from extinction. Of the approximately 1,300 listed species found in part or entirely in the United States and its waters, NMFS has jurisdiction over approximately 60 species. NMFS' rulemaking actions are focused on determining whether any species under its responsibility is an endangered or threatened species and whether those species must be added to the list of protected species. NMFS is also responsible for designating, reviewing, and revising critical habitat for any listed species. In addition, under the ESA, Federal agencies consult with NMFS on any proposed action authorized, funded, or carried out by that agency that may affect listed species or designated critical habitat, or that may affect proposed species or critical habitat. These interagency consultations are designed to assist Federal agencies in fulfilling their duty to ensure Federal actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, while still allowing Federal agencies to fulfill their respective missions (

e.g.,

permitting infrastructure projects or oil and gas exploration, conducting military readiness activities).

NOAA's Regulatory Plan Actions

While most of the rulemakings undertaken by NOAA do not rise to the level necessary to be included in Commerce's regulatory plan, NMFS is undertaking four actions that rise to the level of “most important” of Commerce's significant regulatory actions and thus are included in this year's regulatory plan. A description of the four regulatory plan actions is provided below.

Additionally, NMFS is undertaking a series of rulemakings that are considered deregulatory, as defined by Executive Order 13771. Such actions directly benefit the regulated community by increasing access, providing more economic opportunity, reducing costs, and/or increasing flexibility. A specific example of such an action is the Commerce Trusted Trader Program, as described below. Other examples include actions implementing FMPs that alleviate or reduce previous requirements.

1. Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported Fishing; Fisheries Enforcement; High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act (0648-BG11):

The U.S. is a signatory to the Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA). The agreement is aimed at combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities by increased port inspection for foreign fishing vessels and closing seafood markets to the products of illegal fishing. Benefits of the rule will accrue when IUU vessels are denied entry to the U.S., and illegal seafood products are precluded from the U.S. supply chain, thereby maintaining higher prices and market share for legitimate producers of fishery products.

2. Commerce Trusted Trader Program (0648-BG51):

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, importation of fish products taken in violation of foreign law and regulation is prohibited. To enforce this prohibition, NMFS has implemented the Seafood Import Monitoring Program (81 FR 88975, December 9, 2016) which requires U.S. importers to report on the origin of fish products and to keep supply chain records. The Commerce Trusted Trader Program will establish a voluntary program for certified seafood importers that provides benefits such as reduced targeting and inspections, and enhanced streamlined entry into the United States. The program will require that a Commerce Trusted Trader establish a secure supply chain and maintain the records necessary to verify the legality of all designated product entering into U.S. commerce, but it will excuse the Commerce Trusted Trader from entering that data into the International Trade Data System prior to entry, as required by Seafood Import Monitoring Program. This program is deregulatory in nature because it reduces reporting costs at entry and reduces recordkeeping costs due to flexibility in archiving.

3. Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys in the Gulf of Mexico (0648-BB38):

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) prohibits the “take” (

e.g.,

behavioral harassment, injury, or mortality) of marine mammals with certain exceptions, including through the issuance of incidental take authorizations. Where there is a reasonable likelihood of an activity resulting in the take of marine mammals—as is the case for certain methods of geophysical exploration, including the use of airgun arrays (

i.e.,

“seismic surveys”)—action proponents must ensure that take occurs in a lawful manner. However, there has not previously been any analysis of industry survey activities in the Gulf of Mexico conducted pursuant to requirements of MMPA, and industry operators have been, and currently are, conducting their work without MMPA incidental take authorizations. In support of the oil and gas industry, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has requested 5-year incidental take regulations, which would provide a regulatory framework under which individual companies could apply for project-specific Letters of Authorization. Providing for industry compliance with the MMPA through the requested regulatory framework, versus companies pursuing individual authorizations, would be the most efficient way to achieve such compliance for both industry and for NMFS, and would provide regulatory certainty for industry operators.

4. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Threatened Caribbean and Indo-Pacific Reef-building Corals (0648-BG26):

Caribbean and Indo-Pacific reef building corals were listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in September 2014. Section 4 of the ESA requires that critical habitat be specified to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time a species is listed (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)). The ESA also requires that we publish final critical habitat rules within one year of proposed rules. At the time these corals were listed, we were unable to determine what areas met the statutory definition of critical habitat. We subsequently published a proposed rule to designate critical habitat. This action would designate new critical habitat for twelve corals (Dendrogyra cylindrus, Orbicella annularis, Orbicella faveolata, Orbicella franksi, Mycetophyllia ferox, Acropora globiceps, Acropora jacquelineae, Acropora retusa, Acropora speciosa, Euphyllia paradivisa, Isopora crateriformis, and Seriatopora aculeata) and revise the 2008 critical habitat designation for two corals (Acropora palmata and Acropora cervicornis).

BIS

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) advances U.S. national security,

foreign policy, and economic objectives by maintaining and strengthening adaptable, efficient, and effective export control and treaty compliance systems as well as by administering programs to prioritize certain contracts to promote the national defense and to protect and enhance the defense industrial base.

Major Programs and Activities

BIS administers four sets of regulations. The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) regulate exports and reexports to protect national security, foreign policy, and short supply interests. The EAR also regulates U.S. persons' participation in certain boycotts administered by foreign governments. The National Security Industrial Base Regulations provide for prioritization of certain contracts and allocations of resources to promote the national defense, require reporting of foreign Government-imposed offsets in defense sales, provide for surveys to assess the capabilities of the industrial base to support the national defense and address the effect of imports on the defense industrial base. The Chemical Weapons Convention Regulations implement declaration, reporting, and on-site inspection requirements in the private sector necessary to meet United States treaty obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty. The Additional Protocol Regulations implement similar requirements with respect to an agreement between the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

BIS also has an enforcement component with nine offices covering the United States. BIS export control officers are also stationed at several U.S. embassies and consulates abroad. BIS works with other U.S. Government agencies to promote coordinated U.S. Government efforts in export controls and other programs. BIS participates in U.S. Government efforts to strengthen multilateral export control regimes and to promote effective export controls through cooperation with other Governments

BIS's Regulatory Plan Action

BIS maintains the EAR, including the Commerce Control List (CCL). The CCL describes commodities, software, and technology that are subject to licensing requirements for specific reasons for control. The Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), maintains the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), including the United States Munitions List (USML), which describes defense articles subject to State's licensing jurisdiction.

In Fiscal Year 2018, BIS plans to publish a proposed rule describing how articles the President has determined no longer warrant control under USML Category I (Firearms, Close Assault Weapons and Combat Shotguns), Category II (Guns and Armament), and Category III (Ammunition/Ordnance) would be controlled on the CCL and by the EAR. This proposed rule will be published in conjunction with a DDTC proposed rule that would amend the list of articles controlled by those USML Categories to describe more precisely items warranting continued control on that list.

The changes that will be described in these proposed rules are based on a review of those categories by the Department of Defense, which worked with the Departments of State and Commerce in preparing the amendments. The review was focused on identifying the types of articles that are now controlled on the USML that are either (i) inherently military and otherwise warrant control on the USML or (ii) if of a type common to non-military firearms applications, possess parameters or characteristics that provide a critical military or intelligence advantage to the United States, and are almost exclusively available from the United States. If an article satisfies one or both of those criteria, the article will remain on the USML. If an article does not satisfy either criterion, it will be identified in the new Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) included in the BIS proposed rule. Thus, the scope of the items that will be described in the proposed rule is essentially commercial items widely available in retail outlets and less sensitive military items.

Although the firearms and other items described in the proposed rule are widely used for sporting applications, BIS will not propose to “de-control” these items. BIS would require licenses to export or reexport to any country a firearm or other weapon that would be added to the CCL by the proposed rule. Rather than decontrolling firearms and other items, in publishing the proposed rule, BIS, working with the Departments of Defense and State, is trying to reduce the procedural burdens and costs of export compliance on the U.S. firearms industry while allowing the U.S. Government to control firearms appropriately and to make better use of its export control resources.

United States Patent Trademark Office

The United States Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) mission is to foster innovation, competitiveness and economic growth, domestically and abroad by delivering high quality and timely examination of patent and trademark applications, guiding domestic and international intellectual property policy, and delivering intellectual property information and education worldwide.

Major Programs and Activities

USPTO is the Federal agency for granting U.S. patents and registering trademarks. In doing this, the USPTO fulfills the mandate of Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the Constitution that the legislative branch “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” The USPTO registers trademarks based on the commerce clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). Under this system of protection, American industry has flourished. New products have been invented, new uses for old ones discovered, and employment opportunities created for millions of Americans. The strength and vitality of the U.S. economy depends directly on effective mechanisms that protect new ideas and investments in innovation and creativity. The continued demand for patents and trademarks underscores the ingenuity of American inventors and entrepreneurs. The USPTO is at the cutting edge of the nation's technological progress and achievement.

The USPTO advises the President of the United States, the Secretary of Commerce, and U.S. government agencies on intellectual property (IP) policy, protection, and enforcement; and promotes the stronger and more effective IP protection around the world. The USPTO furthers effective IP protection for U.S. innovators and entrepreneurs worldwide by working with other agencies to secure strong IP provisions in free trade and other international agreements. It also provides training, education, and capacity building programs designed to foster respect for IP and encourage the development of strong IP enforcement regimes by U.S. trading partners. USPTO administers regulations located at title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations concerning its patent and trademark services, and the other functions it performs.

USPTO's Regulatory Plan Action

Final Rule:

Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees during Fiscal Year 2017 (RIN 0651-AD02): The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), enacted in 2011, provided USPTO with the authority to set and adjust its fees for

patent and trademark services. In early 2013, USPTO issued a final rule, “Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees” (RIN 0651-AC54, 78 FR 4212, Jan. 18, 2013), in which USPTO for the first time set a new fee structure for patent services using the authority provided by Section 10 of the AIA. Since then, USPTO has conducted an internal biennial fee review, in which it undertook internal consideration of the current fee structure, and considering ways that the structure might be improved, including rulemaking pursuant to the USPTO's fee setting authority. This fee review process involved public outreach, including, as required by the Act, public hearings held by the USPTO's Public Advisory Committees (which were held in late 2015), as well as public comment and other outreach to the user community and public in general. In October 2016, USPTO published an NPRM proposing the setting and adjusting of patent fees. The comment period for that propose rule closed on December 2, 2016. Per E.O. 12866, this NPRM was determined to be economically significant. USPTO has reviewed all public comments received and considered made revisions to its proposed fee adjustments based on those comments. USPTO is now in the process of preparing a final rule that will set and adjust patent fees. In this final rule, the USPTO will set and adjust Patent fee amounts to provide the Office with a sufficient amount of aggregate revenue to recover its aggregate cost of operations while helping the Office maintain a sustainable funding model, reduce the current patent application backlog, decrease patent pendency, improve quality, and upgrade the Office's business information technology capability and infrastructure. USPTO anticipates publishing this rule in the fall of 2017, with new fees to be effective 60 days after the rule publishes.

The Economic Development Administration

The Economic Development Administration (EDA) provides assistance to economically distressed communities in order to stimulate commercial growth, improve infrastructure, and generate employment opportunities. Over the next year, EDA will continue to implement grants and assistance programs that achieve the agency's mission, in line with statutory authority, and also support the President's agenda. Accordingly, EDA's regulatory activities target new efforts to streamline and simplify agency process.

EDA's Regulatory Action Plan

EDA published a final rule that focused on improving and modernizing EDA's oversight of its Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Program under the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended (PWEDA). The RLF Program provides grants to eligible recipients, such as local governments and non-profit organizations, to operate lending programs that offer low-interest loans and flexible repayment terms, primarily to small businesses in distressed communities that are unable to obtain traditional bank financing. The final rule implemented a risk-based oversight approach that has improved EDA oversight of the RLF Program, consistent with recommendations from the Department's Office of Inspector General. In particular, EDA's shift to a modern risk analysis system concentrates EDA's limited oversight resources on those RLFs at greatest risk and simultaneously reduced compliance burdens on successful RLFs.

EDA's transition to risk-based monitoring of the RLF Program is expected to result in more efficient and effective oversight of the RLF Program through reduced reporting, compliance, and monitoring costs of approximately $960,000 each year. For this reason, the final rule was a “deregulatory action” under Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.” These regulatory changes were necessary regardless of whether EDA continues to operate or if EDA were to be eliminated by Congress as requested in the President's Fiscal Year 2018 Budget because the Department is under an obligation to administer and monitor RLF grants in perpetuity under current statutory authorities. The regulatory changes made by the Final Rule would enable EDA or the Department to more efficiently manage the residual RLF portfolio going forward.

The final rule also effectuated important, but less comprehensive, updates to other parts of EDA's regulations implementing PWEDA that enable EDA or the Department to more effectively oversee the non-RLF grant portfolio, even in the event of EDA's elimination by Congress. These non-RLF PWEDA regulations ensure that grantees continue to use projects for the purpose originally funded and to eventually execute releases of the Federal interest in the property at the expiration of the useful life, often 20 years after the date of the grant award.

DOC—NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)

Proposed Rule Stage

9. Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys in the Gulf of Mexico

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Regulatory.

Legal Authority:

16 U.S.C. 1361

et seq.

CFR Citation:

50 CFR 217.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

The National Marine Fisheries Service is taking this action in response to an October 17, 2016, application from the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to promulgate regulations and issue Letters of Authorization to take marine mammals incidental to oil and gas industry sponsored seismic surveys for purposes of geophysical exploration on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico from approximately 2018 through 2023. BOEM states that underwater activities associated with sound sources (

i.e.,

airguns, boomers, sparkers, and chirpers) may expose marine mammals in the area to noise and pressure.

Statement of Need:

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) prohibits the “take” (

e.g.,

behavioral harassment, injury, or mortality) of marine mammals with certain exceptions, including through the issuance of incidental take authorizations. Where there is a reasonable likelihood of an activity resulting in the take of marine mammals—as is the case for certain methods of geophysical exploration, including the use of airgun arrays (

i.e.,

“seismic surveys”)—action proponents must ensure that take occurs in a lawful manner. However, there has not previously been any analysis of industry survey activities in the Gulf of Mexico conducted pursuant to requirements of MMPA, and industry operators have been, and currently are, conducting their work without MMPA incidental take authorizations. In support of the oil and gas industry, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has requested five-year incidental take regulations, which would provide a regulatory framework under which individual companies could apply for project-specific letters of authorization. Providing for industry compliance with the MMPA through the requested regulatory framework, versus companies pursuing individual authorizations would be the most efficient way to

achieve such compliance for both industry and for NMFS, and would provide regulatory certainty for industry operators.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Alternatives:

While the MMPA does not require consideration of alternatives in rulemaking, the regulatory impact analysis considers a more stringent and less stringent regulatory alternative. The more stringent alternative would require more mitigation of industry authorization-holders. The less stringent alternative is the basis for the proposed rule. As an alternative to regulation, individual companies could request specific permits known as incidental harassment authorizations (IHA). However, these permits require approximately six to nine months to obtain (compared with an anticipated less than three months to obtain letters of authorization under a rule), are information-intensive in terms of the required application, and require a public comment period. They also must be renewed on a yearly basis, whereas a Letter of Authorization lasts for five years.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

The proposed rule would include mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements, as required by the MMPA. However, as the proposed rule would alleviate other current regulatory requirements that would otherwise be expected to cost 37.8 to 230 million dollars per year, it is estimated to result in a net annualized savings of 8 to 123 million dollars (the range of values reflects ranges of projected future activity levels). The proposed rule would result in additional indirect (non-monetized) costs as a result of the imposition of time-area restrictions on survey effort. However, these costs are expected to be minimal, as two of three proposed restrictions are in areas with low to no levels of activity and a third, which has been in place under current baseline conditions, is seasonal and therefore may be planned around. The proposed rule would also result in certain non-monetized benefits. The protection of marine mammals afforded by this rule (pursuant to the requirements of the MMPA) would benefit the regional economic value of marine mammals via tourism and recreation to some extent, as mitigation measures applied to geophysical survey activities in the GOM region are expected to benefit the marine mammal populations that support this economic activity in the GOM. The proposed rule would also afford significant benefit to the regulated industry by providing an efficient framework within which compliance with the MMPA, and the attendant regulatory certainty, may be achieved. Cost savings may be generated in particular by the reduced administrative effort required to obtain an LOA under the framework established by a rule compared to what would be required to obtain an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA. Absent the rule, survey operators in the GOM would likely be required to apply for an IHA. Although not monetized, NMFS' analysis indicates that the upfront work associated with the rule (

e.g.,

analyses, modeling, process for obtaining LOA) would likely save significant time and money for operators.

Risks:

Absent the rule, oil and gas industry operators would face a highly uncertain regulatory environment due to the imminent threat of litigation. BOEM currently issues permits under a stay of ongoing litigation, in the absence of the proposed rule the litigation would continue and NMFS would be added as a defendant. The IHA application process that would be available to companies would be more expensive and time-consuming.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

12/00/17

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal.

Energy Effects:

Statement of Energy Effects planned as required by Executive Order 13211.

Agency Contact:

Donna Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910,

Phone:

301 427-8400.

RIN:

0648-BB38

DOC—NOAA

10. Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported Fishing; Fisheries Enforcement; High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Regulatory.

Legal Authority:

Pub. L. 114-81

CFR Citation:

50 CFR 300.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This proposed rule will make conforming amendments to regulations implementing the various statutes amended by the Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-81). The Act amends several regional fishery management organization implementing statutes as well as the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act. It also provides authority to implement two new international agreements the Antigua Convention, which amends the Convention for the establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Port State Measures Agreement), which restricts the entry into U.S. ports by foreign fishing vessels that are known to be or are suspected of engaging in illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. This proposed rule will also implement the Port State Measures Agreement. To that end, this proposed rule will require the collection of certain information from foreign fishing vessels requesting permission to use U.S. ports. It also includes procedures to designate and publicize the ports to which foreign fishing vessels may seek entry and procedures for conducting inspections of these foreign vessels accessing U.S. ports. Further, the rule establishes procedures for notification of: The denial of port entry or port services for a foreign vessel, the withdrawal of the denial of port services if applicable, the taking of enforcement action with respect to a foreign vessel, or the results of any inspection of a foreign vessel to the flag nation of the vessel and other competent authorities as appropriate.

Statement of Need:

The United States is a signatory to the Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA). The agreement is aimed at combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities by increased port inspection for foreign fishing vessels and closing seafood markets to the products of illegal fishing.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Alternatives:

Alternatives to taking action at the port would include taking action at sea against IUU fishing vessels and in the supply chain against IUU fishing products. At-sea monitoring and inspection is part of an overall strategy to combat IUU fishing, but it is extremely expensive and resources are limited. Likewise, tracing and removing illegal products already released into the market would be difficult and resource intensive. Preventing entry of IUU fishing vessels into ports or

investigating fishing vessels at the port is an efficient and effective approach to combatting illegal activity.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

The anticipated costs will be minimal in that foreign vessels requesting permission to visit U.S. ports will have to include more information about the vessel and its cargo when they submit an electronic notice of arrival to the U.S. Coast Guard. Based on the information submitted, NMFS may deny port privileges for vessels known to have engaged in illegal fishing or to meet the vessel to conduct an inspection. The minimal additional data elements required of foreign fishing vessels will be submitted electronically through the existing U.S. Coast Guard system for notices of Arrival and Departure, thus reporting costs are not anticipated to affect shipping patterns, port usage, or international commerce. In addition, vessel inspections will be coordinated and planned based on the notice of arrival submitted prior to entry into port, thus delays for inspection will be minimal and not result in significant costs to legitimate vessels. Benefits of the rule will accrue when IUU vessels are denied entry, and illegal seafood products are precluded from the U.S. supply chain, thereby maintaining higher prices and market share for legitimate producers of fishery products.

Risks:

If the port entry reporting and inspection provisions of this rule were not implemented, there is an increased risk of IUU fishing vessels entering U.S. ports and/or the products of IUU fishing infiltrating the U.S. supply chain. In addition, the U.S. would be out of compliance with its international obligation under the PSMA.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

12/00/17

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Small Entities Affected:

No.

Government Levels Affected:

Federal.

International Impacts:

This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.

Agency Contact:

John Henderschedt, Director, Office for International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 10362, Silver Spring, MD 20910,

Phone:

301 427-8314,

Email: john.henderschedt@noaa.gov.

RIN:

0648-BG11

DOC—NOAA

11. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Threatened Caribbean and Indo-Pacific Reef-Building Corals

Priority:

Other Significant.

E.O. 13771 Designation:

Regulatory.

Legal Authority:

16 U.S.C. 1531

et seq.

CFR Citation:

50 CFR 226.

Legal Deadline:

Final, Statutory, September 10, 2016, Statutory deadline for final critical habitat designation of listed Indo-Pacific corals.

Abstract:

On September 10, 2014, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed 20 species of reef-building corals as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, 15 in the Indo-Pacific and five in the Caribbean. Of the 15 Indo-Pacific species, seven occur in U.S. waters of the Pacific Islands Region, including in American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands, and the Pacific Remote Island Areas. This proposed rule would designate critical habitat for the seven species in U.S. waters (Acropora globiceps, Acropora jacquelineae, Acropora retusa, Acropora speciosa, Euphyllia paradivisa, Isopora crateriformis, and Seriatopora aculeata). The proposed designation would cover coral reef habitat around 17 island or atoll units in the Pacific Islands Region, including four in American Samoa, one in Guam, seven in the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands, and five in Pacific Remote Island Areas, containing essential features that support reproduction, growth, and survival of the listed coral species. This rule also proposes to designate critical habitat for the five Caribbean corals and proposed to revise critical habitat for two, previously-listed corals, Acropora palmata and Acropora cervicornis.

Statement of Need:

Caribbean and Indo-Pacific reef building corals were listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in September 2014. Section 4 of the ESA requires that critical habitat be specified to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time a species is listed (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)). The ESA also requires that we publish final critical habitat rules within one year of proposed rules. At the time these corals were listed, we were unable to determine what areas

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.