Agencies and Commissions August 2016 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

Notice is hereby given that the presiding administrative law judge has issued a recommended determination on remedy and bonding in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting comments on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief, in the event the Commission finds a violation, specifically a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders, lasting no more than one month, against certain activity tracking devices, systems, and components thereof, imported by respondents Fitbit, Inc. of San Francisco, California; Flextronics International Ltd. of San Jose, California; and Flextronics Sales & Marketing (A-P) Ltd. of Port Louis, Mauritius. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4).

In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB's estimate of the burden of the collection of the information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Title and purpose of information collection: Vocational Report; OMB 3220-0141. Section 2 of the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA) provides for payment of disability annuities to qualified employees and widow(ers). The establishment of permanent disability for work in the applicant's ``regular occupation'' or for work in any regular employment is prescribed in 20 CFR 220.12 and 220.13 respectively. The RRB utilizes Form G-251, Vocational Report, to obtain an applicant's work history. This information is used by the RRB to determine the effect of a disability on an applicant's ability to work. Form G-251 is designed for use with the RRB's disability benefit application forms and is provided to all applicants for employee disability annuities and to those applicants for a widow(er)'s disability annuity who indicate that they have been employed at some time. The RRB recently received short-term approval of a Request for Emergency Clearance from the Office of Management and Budget for this information collection. In response to that request the RRB received comments from 3 railroad labor organizations commenting on the RRB's action. The comments centered on the collection of information associated with the following items: Item 12, ``Describe the essential duties of the position'': Comments received preferred the use of the term ``basic'' rather than ``essential'' stating the use of ``essential'' duties ``is subjective, and could mislead an employee to inadvertently fail to list something that may be significant to the Board's examiner.'' Item 13, ``Describe the environmental conditions that the position exposes you to'': Comments received preferred the use of the term ``hazards'' rather than ``conditions'' stating that the use of the term ``conditions'' may lead the employee respondent and the RRB claim examiners to different conclusions simply by changing the terms used, i.e., ``a hazard explains a present danger, or more importantly, a risk to the employee's life, health or safety. A condition, on the other hand, could be anything that either carries risk with it or is benign in nature.'' Item 14, ``Indicate below the kind and amount of physical activity this job involved during a typical 8-hour workday'': Comments received stated that many railroad operating employees do not have a routine day or typical work day and that the question does not adequately provide for employees ``who are subject to duty periods of 12 hours.'' Item 15, ``Has your employer made permanent adjustments to this job to accommodate you'': Comments ranged from the question ``asks an employee to speculate on the kind of accommodations an employer has made to accommodate them'' to ``employees may receive informal or temporary accommodations that do not rise to the level of a permanent accommodation.'' Additional comments expressed concern that RRB examiners may interpret non-permanent accommodations as an indicator that an employee may not have a disability. RRB staff responded to the railroad labor organizations' comments, specifically with regard to: Item 12: Whereas it was acknowledged that the use of either term ``essential'' or ``basic'' can be subjective, the RRB decided to use the term ``essential'' to address any allegations that the RRB awards disability benefits to individuals if they are incapable of performing a simple non-essential task. If a duty is unintentionally omitted, the RRB believes the information requested in subsequent questions 13 and 14 will capture that information. Lastly, the RRB assured commenters that the appropriate legal standard will be applied when adjudicating a disability application. Item 13: Use of the term ``conditions'' provides an RRB claims examiner with all the environmental conditions that an applicant is exposed to, not just the environmental hazards. It is intended to be inclusive and capture the essence of all experiences at work, whether they are hazardous or benign in nature. Item 14: The purpose of the question is to provide the RRB examiner with an understanding of the types of physical activities required in the performance of the applicant's jobs. The RRB uses 8 hours as the typical work schedule to estimate the hours worked daily by an employee. However, the instructions to Item 14 provide the employee the option to check the exact number of hours worked daily. Item 15: A work accommodation can be relevant in determining whether an individual is disabled. The RRB determined, consistent with RRB Legal Opinion 98-15, that accommodations are to be taken into consideration if they are essential to the performance of the employee's particular occupation and only if the accommodated job was performed consistently for at least 5 years. Item 15, allows the RRB to gather specific information about whether accommodations provided should be considered in accordance with Legal Opinion 98-15. Applicants are not asked to speculate about accommodations, but to provide information about accommodations actually put into effect. After a careful and thorough evaluation of the comments received, the RRB is now moving forward with a standard renewal of the information collection. No changes are proposed to Form G-251. Completion is required to obtain or retain a benefit. One response is requested of each respondent.

This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of West Virginia dated 08/23/2016. Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding. Incident Period: 07/29/2016 through 07/30/2016. Effective Date: 08/23/2016. Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/24/2016. Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/23/2017.

NCUA, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on a new collection of information, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

The Federal Maritime Commission (Commission) is amending its user fees to more accurately align fees with the costs associated with each service provided by the Commission. Specifically, the Commission is increasing fees for: Filing complaints and certain petitions; records searches, document copying, and admissions to practice; paper filing of ocean transportation intermediary (OTI) applications; filing applications for special permission; and filing agreements. The Commission is also lowering fees for: Reviewing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests; revising clerical errors on service contracts; revising clerical errors on non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVOCC) service arrangements; and Commission services to passenger vessel operators (PVOs). In addition, the Commission is repealing four existing fees for: Adding interested parties to a specific docket mailing list; the Regulated Persons Index database; database reports on Effective Carrier Agreements; and filing petitions for rulemaking, and adding a new fee for requests for expedited review of an agreement filing.

This action adds a service to the Procurement List that will be furnished by a nonprofit agency employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently submitted a renewal of an existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The information collection is entitled, ``NRC Form 237, Request for Access Authorization.''

This action adds products and a service to the Procurement List that will be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes products and services from the Procurement List previously furnished by such agencies.