Tongass National Forest; Alaska; Forest Plan Amendment, 35934-35935 [2015-15362]

Download as PDF 35934 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Notices 7. What alternative procurement models might State Agencies consider to ensure they receive viable competitive bids? 8. Should State agencies pursue coalition procurements with the benefits they bring, such as economies of scale, or does it tend to limit competition or discourage new entrants into the marketplace? mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Pricing 9. Does the impact of the EBT vendor assuming development and implementation costs before they begin processing transactions pose a major barrier to entering the market? 10. Are there ways to separate EBT system development/startup costs from operational costs to reduce risk for new entrants when bidding on a project? If so, what are they? 1 11. Are there other changes to the CPCM pricing model that would encourage potential vendors to enter the EBT market? 12. The tiered pricing model involves tiers within the CPCM pricing model, adjusted at smaller or larger intervals for different caseload levels. How can State consortia which want to procure together better realize economies of scale given their varying caseload sizes, and still benefit from a blended CPCM price based on their collective caseload volumes? 13. Are there pricing models other than the CPCM model that would be advantageous in reducing pricing risk to the vendor and still maintain sustainable prices for the State agencies? How can the disadvantages to State agencies in forecasting expenses be overcome, if costs are no longer tied to caseload levels? Managing Risk Several stakeholders have advised FNS that too many procurements occurring in close succession may increase the risk that smaller State Agencies may receive fewer or even no bids, as vendors will devote scarce resources to preparing proposals for the most potentially profitable customers. Similarly, if too many implementations or conversions are scheduled in close succession, it may mean that vendors will not have sufficient technical resources to assign their top team to each one. Both of these situations represent risks which FNS would like to 1 SNAP procurements involve acquiring an operational process with costs for start-up activities included in the monthly operational cost-per-casemonth. WIC procurements are conversions from paper to electronic delivery with deliverables and milestones for start-up that may be priced separately. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jun 22, 2015 Jkt 235001 help State Agencies manage and mitigate. 14. Besides sharing known and estimated RFP release dates and conversion dates, what can FNS do to help State Agencies manage these risks and ensure smooth transitions? Other Questions 15. Are there other areas or issues that we have not specifically asked for a response on which you would like to offer comment related to the two main objectives of this RFI? Dated: June 10, 2015. Jeffrey J. Tribiano, Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. Attached: Appendix A: EBT Functions for Online SNAP and WIC EBT Appendix B: EBT Functions for Offline WIC EBT Cards (Smart Cards) Appendix C: Web sites to RFP and other EBT information: Appendix A EBT Functions for On-line SNAP and WIC EBT (1) Account setup and benefit authorization—support for on-line accounts for SNAP or WIC households authorized to receive benefits; (2) Card issuance and participant training—provide cards, equipment (PIN pads, card readers and training materials); (3) Participant account maintenance— receive daily and monthly benefit updates from State agency systems, aging benefits and reporting; (4) Transaction processing—approval or denial of food purchases made at authorized SNAP and WIC retailers/vendors; WIC processing includes, but is not limited to, matching of food item UPC, price and quantity; (5) Customer service—24x7 toll-free call support with help desk customer service representatives and Interactive Voice Response and web portal services inquiries related to purchase activities and balances from cardholders, merchants and State agency staff; (6) Retailer participation—support commercial third party switching services and installation and maintenance of payment terminals in smaller retail locations. Manual backup vouchers for authorizations during system interruptions or for low volume SNAP merchants; (7) EBT settlement—daily payment to authorized retailers for approved purchases; reconciliation via reports and data file exchanges, WIC also includes food item detail; (8) EBT reporting—administrative and batch data exchange for reporting card account activities by card number and retail location; daily financial settlement reporting and reconciliation; and, (9) Disaster Benefit Services (SNAP only)— providing card and benefit services for natural disasters. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Appendix B EBT Functions for Offline WIC EBT (Smart Cards) WIC off-line EBT processing relies on State agencies to load a smart card chip with WIC food balances that can be read in grocery store lanes. Card and Personal Identification Number (PIN) support is provided by the State agency using the clinic system that tracks and determines participant benefits. Purchases are authorized off-line in the grocery lane (without an on-line authorization) and a daily claim file is sent to the WIC EBT host for processing payment to the WIC vendors. A hot card file, reconciliation file and authorized product list (APL) (containing the list of approved Universal Product Codes (UPC) and price look-up (PLU) codes called the APL file) are provided to the WIC grocer via the EBT host (an FTP server). (1) EBT host processing—processing of daily WIC claim files containing WIC transaction purchases, editing for Not-toExceed price limits, and pick-up of hot card, APL and reconciliation files to authorized WIC retail vendors. (2) Retail vendor equipage & integrated support (State agency option) (3) Customer Service (State agency option)—toll-free call center support including customer service representatives, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and/or web portal services for cardholder and retailer and State agency staff inquiries. (4) EBT Reporting—administrative and batch data to support all processing and authorization activities. (5) Settlement and Reconciliation—similar to SNAP settlement but also includes food product information. Appendix C Web sites to RFP and other EBT information SNAP EBT Status—https:// www.fns.usda.gov/ebt/general-electronicbenefit-transfer-ebt-information WIC EBT Status—https://www.fns.usda.gov/ wic/wic-ebt-activities WIC Technology Partners (Provides links to new and updated solicitations)—https:// www.wictechnologypartners.com/ solicitations/RFP-B2Z12017/index.php [FR Doc. 2015–15336 Filed 6–22–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–30–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Tongass National Forest; Alaska; Forest Plan Amendment Forest Service, USDA. Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement; correction. AGENCY: ACTION: A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to amend the 2008 Tongass National Forest Land and Resource SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Notices Management Plan (Forest Plan) was published in the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) on May 27, 2014. The Tongass National Forest is publishing this corrected NOI due to changes in the anticipated dates for the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD, to designate a new responsible official for the plan amendment, and to clarify the pre-decisional administrative review process. The 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR part 219) includes subpart B, which establishes a pre-decisional administrative review (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘objection’’) process for plan amendments giving an individual or entity an opportunity for an independent Forest Service review and resolution of issues before the approval of a plan amendment documented with a ROD (reference 36 CFR part 219, subpart B). This Forest Plan Amendment is subject to the objection process. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Howle, Project Manager, Tongass National Forest, Ketchikan, AK 99901, (907) 228–6340. Corrections In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 30074, in the third column under the ‘‘Dates’’ caption, correct the second and fourth sentences to read: The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be published in October 2015, which will begin a 90-day public comment period. The Record of Decision is expected to be signed in October 2016. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 30075, in the third column under ‘‘Scoping Process’’ caption, correct by adding the following as a third paragraph: Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 219, subpart B; published April 9, 2012 (77 FR 21162) include an objection process that applies to plan amendments. This proposed plan amendment is subject to 36 CFR 219, subpart B. There will be an objection process before the final decision is made, and after the final environmental impact statement and draft Record of Decision are made available to the public. Individuals and entities as defined in 36 CFR 219.53 who have submitted substantive formal comments related to the plan amendment during the opportunities for public comment as provided in subpart A (reference 36 CFR 219.16) may file an objection. Objections will be accepted only from those who have previously submitted substantive formal comments related to the plan amendment during scoping, the 90-day DEIS comment period, or other public involvement opportunity where comments are requested VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jun 22, 2015 Jkt 235001 by the responsible official in accordance with 36 CFR 219.16. In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 30075, in the third column at bottom, correct the name and title ‘‘Forrest Cole, Tongass Forest Supervisor’’ to read: M. Earl Stewart, Tongass Forest Supervisor Dated: June 16, 2015. M. Earl Stewart, Forest Supervisor, Tongass National Forest. [FR Doc. 2015–15362 Filed 6–22–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–11–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board DATES: Effective Date: June 23, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annathea Cook, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7425. Background Foreign-Trade Zone 245—Decatur, Illinois; Authorization of Production Activity; Thyssenkrupp Presta Danville, LLC (Camshafts); Danville, Illinois On February 18, 2015, the Economic Development Corporation of Decatur & Macon County, grantee of FTZ 245, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board on behalf of Thyssenkrupp Presta Danville, LLC, within Subzone 245C, in Danville, Illinois. The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (80 FR 9693, 2–24– 2015). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.14. Dated: June 18, 2015. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–15475 Filed 6–22–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–893] Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014–2015 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: Frm 00004 The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp (‘‘shrimp’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) for the period February 1, 2014 through January 31, 2015. SUMMARY: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [B–10–2015] PO 00000 35935 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 On April 3, 2015, based on a timely request for review on behalf of the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (‘‘Petitioner’’) 1 and the American Shrimp Processors Association (‘‘Domestic Processors’’),2 the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on shrimp from the PRC covering the period February 1, 2014, through January 31, 2015.3 The review covers sixty two companies.4 On April 16, 2015, and May 1, 2015, respectively, Petitioner and Domestic Processors withdrew their requests for an administrative review on all of the sixty two companies listed in the Initiation Notice.5 No other party requested a review of these companies or any other exporters of subject merchandise. 1 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (‘‘AHSTAC’’) ‘‘Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Republic of China: Request for Administrative Reviews’’ (February 27, 2015). 2 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the American Shrimp Processors Association (‘‘ASPA’’) ‘‘Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order Covering Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of China (POR 10:2/1/14–1/31/15): American Shrimp Processors Association’s Request for an Administrative Review’’ (February 27, 2015). 3 See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 18202, 18208 (April 3rd, 2015) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). 4 See id. 5 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Petitioner ‘‘Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Republic of China: Domestic Producers’ Withdrawal of Review Requests’’ (April 16, 2015); Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Domestic Processors ‘‘Administrative Review of Antidumping Duty Order Covering Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of China: Withdrawal of Review Request on Behalf of the American Shrimp Processors Association’’ (May 1, 2015). E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35934-35935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15362]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Tongass National Forest; Alaska; Forest Plan Amendment

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement; 
correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement to amend the 2008 Tongass National Forest Land and Resource

[[Page 35935]]

Management Plan (Forest Plan) was published in the Federal Register (79 
FR 30074) on May 27, 2014. The Tongass National Forest is publishing 
this corrected NOI due to changes in the anticipated dates for the 
draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and Record of Decision 
(ROD, to designate a new responsible official for the plan amendment, 
and to clarify the pre-decisional administrative review process. The 
2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR part 219) includes subpart B, which 
establishes a pre-decisional administrative review (hereinafter 
referred to as ``objection'') process for plan amendments giving an 
individual or entity an opportunity for an independent Forest Service 
review and resolution of issues before the approval of a plan amendment 
documented with a ROD (reference 36 CFR part 219, subpart B). This 
Forest Plan Amendment is subject to the objection process.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Howle, Project Manager, Tongass 
National Forest, Ketchikan, AK 99901, (907) 228-6340.

Corrections

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 
30074, in the third column under the ``Dates'' caption, correct the 
second and fourth sentences to read:

    The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be 
published in October 2015, which will begin a 90-day public comment 
period.

    The Record of Decision is expected to be signed in October 2016.

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 
30075, in the third column under ``Scoping Process'' caption, correct 
by adding the following as a third paragraph:

    Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 219, subpart B; published 
April 9, 2012 (77 FR 21162) include an objection process that 
applies to plan amendments. This proposed plan amendment is subject 
to 36 CFR 219, subpart B. There will be an objection process before 
the final decision is made, and after the final environmental impact 
statement and draft Record of Decision are made available to the 
public. Individuals and entities as defined in 36 CFR 219.53 who 
have submitted substantive formal comments related to the plan 
amendment during the opportunities for public comment as provided in 
subpart A (reference 36 CFR 219.16) may file an objection. 
Objections will be accepted only from those who have previously 
submitted substantive formal comments related to the plan amendment 
during scoping, the 90-day DEIS comment period, or other public 
involvement opportunity where comments are requested by the 
responsible official in accordance with 36 CFR 219.16.

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 30074) of May 27, 2014 on page 
30075, in the third column at bottom, correct the name and title 
``Forrest Cole, Tongass Forest Supervisor'' to read:

    M. Earl Stewart, Tongass Forest Supervisor

    Dated: June 16, 2015.
M. Earl Stewart,
Forest Supervisor, Tongass National Forest.
[FR Doc. 2015-15362 Filed 6-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.