19429 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 
previously issued. It is unlikely that 
prior public comment would result in a significant change from the subject contained herein. Therefore, notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are unnecessary and the FAA finds good cause, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3), making these special conditions effective upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for comment described above. 
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23 
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and 
symbols. Citation 
■The authority citation for these 
special conditions is as follows: 
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 
44701–44702, 44704; Pub. L. 113–53, 127 
Stat 584 (49 U.S.C. 44704) note; 14 CFR 21.16 and 21.101; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19. 
The Special Conditions 
■Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 
delegated to me by the Administrator, 
the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Textron Aviation B300, B300C, B300C (MC–12W), and B300C (UC– 12W) airplanes modified by St. Louis Helicopter, LLC. 
1. Installation of Lithium Battery 
The FAA adopts that the following 
special conditions be applied to lithium 
battery installations on the Textron Aviation models B300, B300C, B300C (MC–12W), and B300C (UC–12W) airplanes in lieu of the requirements § 23.1353 (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e), amendment 23–49. 
Lithium battery installations on the 
models B300, B300C, B300C (MC–12W), and B300C (UC–12W) airplanes must be designed and installed as follows: 
(1) Safe cell temperatures and 
pressures must be maintained during— 
i. Normal operations; 
ii. Any probable failure conditions of 
charging or discharging or battery 
monitoring system; and 
iii. Any failure of the charging or 
battery monitoring system not shown to be extremely remote. 
(2) The rechargeable lithium battery 
installation must be designed to preclude explosion or fire in the event of 1(1)ii and 1(1)iii failures. 
(3) Design of the rechargeable lithium 
batteries must preclude the occurrence of self-sustaining, uncontrolled increases in temperature or pressure. (4) No explosive or toxic gasses 
emitted by any rechargeable lithium battery in normal operation or as the result of any failure of the battery charging system, monitoring system, or battery installation, which is not shown to be extremely remote, may accumulate in hazardous quantities within the airplane. 
(5) Installations of rechargeable 
lithium batteries must meet the requirements of § 23.863(a) through (d), amendment 23–34. 
(6) No corrosive fluids or gases that 
may escape from any rechargeable lithium battery, may damage surrounding structure or any adjacent systems, equipment, electrical wiring, or the airplane in such a way as to cause a major or more severe failure condition, in accordance with § 23.1309, amendment 23–49, and applicable regulatory guidance. 
(7) Each rechargeable lithium battery 
installation must have provisions to prevent any hazardous effect on structure or essential systems that may be caused by the maximum amount of heat the battery can generate during a short circuit of the battery or of its individual cells. 
(8) Rechargeable lithium battery 
installations must have— 
i. A system to automatically control 
the charging rate of the battery to prevent battery overheating and overcharging; and either 
ii. A battery temperature sensing and 
over-temperature warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of an over-temperature condition; or 
iii. A battery failure sensing and 
warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of battery failure. 
(9) Any rechargeable lithium battery 
installation, the function of which is required for safe operation of the aircraft, must incorporate a monitoring and warning feature that will provide an indication to the appropriate flight crewmembers whenever the state of charge of the batteries has fallen below levels considered acceptable for dispatch (see note 1) of the aircraft. 
Note 1: Reference § 23.1353(h) for dispatch 
consideration. 
(10) The Instructions for Continued 
Airworthiness (ICA) required by § 23.1529 must contain maintenance requirements (see note 2) to assure that the battery has been sufficiently charged (see note 3) at appropriate intervals specified by the battery manufacturer and the equipment manufacturer that contain the rechargeable lithium battery or rechargeable lithium battery system. The lithium rechargeable batteries and lithium rechargeable battery systems must not degrade below specified ampere-hour levels sufficient to power the aircraft system. The ICA must also contain procedures for the maintenance of replacement batteries (see note 4) to prevent the installation of batteries that have degraded charge retention ability or other damage due to prolonged storage at a low state of charge. Replacement batteries must be of the same manufacturer and part number as approved by the FAA. 
Note 2: Maintenance requirements include 
procedures that— 
(a) Check battery capacity, charge 
degradation at manufacturers recommended 
inspection intervals; and 
(b) Replace batteries at manufacturers 
recommended replacement schedule/time to prevent age related degradation. 
Note 3: The term ‘‘sufficiently charged’’ 
means that the battery must retain enough charge, expressed in ampere-hours, to ensure that the battery cells will not be damaged. 
A battery cell may be damaged by low 
charge (i.e., below certain level), 
resulting in a reduction in the ability to 
charge and retain a full charge. This reduction would be greater than the reduction that may result from normal operational degradation. 
Note 4: Replacement battery in spares 
storage may be subject to prolonged storage 
at a low state of charge. 
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on April 
23, 2018. 
Pat Mullen, Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, 
Aircraft Certification Service. 
[FR Doc. 2018–09350 Filed 5–2–18; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 
HUMAN SERVICES 
Food and Drug Administration 
21 CFR Part 102 
[Docket No. FDA–2018–N–1438] 
RIN 0910–AI04 
Crabmeat; Amendment of Common or 
Usual Name Regulation 
AGENCY : Food and Drug Administration, 
HHS. 
ACTION : Final rule; technical 
amendment. 
SUMMARY : The Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA or we) is amending the common or usual name 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:59 May 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM 03MYR1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES19430 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 
regulation for crabmeat by replacing 
‘‘brown king crabmeat’’ with ‘‘golden king crabmeat’’ as the common or usual name for crabmeat derived from the species Lithodes aequispinus. We are 
taking this action due to a recently enacted law. We are also correcting an error in the placement of a scientific term, which is editorial in nature. 
DATES : This rule is effective May 3, 
2018. The compliance date for this rule is January 1, 2020. 
ADDRESSES : For access to the docket, go 
to https://www.regulations.gov and 
insert the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this final rule into the ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts, and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : 
Steven Bloodgood, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240–402–5316, Steven.Bloodgood@fda.hhs.gov . 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
Table of Contents 
I. General Overview of Final Rule 
II. Background and Legal Authority III. Compliance Date IV. Economic Analysis of Impacts V. Analysis of Environmental Impact VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 VII. Federalism VIII. Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments 
IX. References 
I. General Overview of Final Rule 
This rule amends § 102.50 (21 CFR 
102.50) to designate ‘‘golden king 
crabmeat’’ as the sole common or usual name of crabmeat derived from the species Lithodes aequispinus. The 
regulation at § 102.50 currently lists ‘‘brown king crabmeat’’ as the common or usual name of crabmeat derived from the species Lithodes aequispina. In 
addition to replacing the common or usual name, we are revising the scientific name to read as Lithodes aequispinus, in accordance with a 
recently enacted law designating the acceptable market name of the species as ‘‘golden king crab.’’ We are also correcting § 102.50 so that Paralithodes platypus appears under the ‘‘Scientific 
name of crab’’ column for King crabmeat. 
II. Background and Legal Authority 
In the Federal Register of July 3, 1995 
(60 FR 34459), we published a final rule 
amending the common or usual name provisions for crabmeat, to provide that the common or usual name of crabmeat derived from the species Lithodes 
aequispina is ‘‘brown king crabmeat.’’ 
On May 5, 2017, the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 115– 31), was signed into law. Section 774 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, provides that, for purposes of applying the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), the acceptable market name of Lithodes aequispinus is ‘‘golden king crab.’’ 
The final rule amends § 102.50 to 
reflect the common or usual name of crabmeat derived from Lithodes aequispinus as provided by the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, and to revise the scientific name of the species. The final rule also corrects § 102.50 to move the scientific name for King crabmeat, Paralithodes platypus, from the ‘‘Common or usual name of crabmeat’’ column to the ‘‘Scientific name of crab’’ column. 
FDA finds good cause for issuing this 
amendment as a final rule without notice and comment because this amendment only updates the regulation to align with the law enacted by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). (‘‘[W]hen regulations merely restate the statute they implement, notice-and-comment 
procedures are unnecessary.’’ Gray Panthers Advocacy Committee v. Sullivan, 936 F.2d 1284, 1291 (DC Cir. 
1991); see also Komjathy v. Nat. Trans. 
Safety Bd., 832 F.2d 1294, 1296 (DC Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1057 (1988) 
(when a rule ‘‘does no more than repeat, virtually verbatim, the statutory grant of authority,’’ notice-and-comment procedures are not required)).) Therefore, we are issuing this amendment as a final rule, and publication of this document constitutes final action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). 
In addition, we find good cause for 
this amendment to become effective on the date of publication of this action. The APA allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication as ‘‘provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule’’ (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). A delayed effective date is unnecessary in this case because the new requirements regarding golden king crab are already effective as a matter of law and because moving the scientific name for King crabmeat is a ministerial action. Therefore, we find good cause for this amendment to become effective on the date of publication of this action. 
III. Compliance Date 
With respect to a compliance date, we 
intend that any adjustments to a 
product’s labeling occur in a manner consistent with our uniform compliance 
date (see 81 FR 85156, November 25, 2016). Thus, the compliance date is January 1, 2020. 
IV. Economic Analysis of Impacts 
We have examined the impacts of the 
final rule under Executive Order 12866, 
Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13771, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct us to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive Order 13771 requires that the costs associated with significant new regulations ‘‘shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations.’’ We believe that this final rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 and is not a deregulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 13771. 
The Regulatory Flexibility Act 
requires us to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small entities. We estimate that the mean cost per crab covered by the final rule is $0.23 (2016$). We estimate that the revenue per crab covered by the final rule ranges from $17.65 to $99.42 (2016$). Because 
the cost per crab covered by the final rule as a percentage of the revenue per crab covered by the final rule is small, ranging from 0.2 percent to 1.3 percent, we certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires us to prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before issuing ‘‘any rule that includes any Federal mandate 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 (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.’’ The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $148 million, using the most current (2016) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This final rule would not result in an expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount. 
We have developed a comprehensive 
Economic Analysis of Impacts that assesses the impacts of the final rule. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:59 May 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM 03MYR1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES19431 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 
The full analysis of economic impacts is 
available in the docket for this final rule (Ref. 1). 
V. Analysis of Environmental Impact 
We have determined under 21 CFR 
25.30(k) that this action is of a type that 
does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. 
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
This final rule contains no collection 
of information. Therefore, clearance by 
the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required. 
VII. Federalism 
We have analyzed this final rule in 
accordance with the principles set forth 
in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the rule does not contain policies 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. Accordingly, we conclude that the rule does not contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not required. 
VIII. Consultation and Coordination 
With Indian Tribal Governments 
We have analyzed this rule in 
accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13175. We have determined that the rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Accordingly, we conclude that the rule does not contain policies that have tribal implications as defined in the Executive Order and, consequently, a tribal summary impact statement is not required. 
IX. References 
The following reference is on display 
in the Dockets Management Staff (see 
ADDRESSES ) and is available for viewing 
by interested persons between 9 a.m. 
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. FDA has verified the website addresses, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but websites are 
subject to change over time. 
1. FDA, ‘‘Crabmeat; Amendment of Common 
or Usual Name Regulation: Final 
Regulatory Impact Analysis,’’ 2017. Also available at https://www.fda.gov/ AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/ Reports/EconomicAnalyses/default.htm . 
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 102 
Beverages, Food grades and standards, 
Food labeling, Frozen foods, Oils and 
fats, Onions, Potatoes, Seafood. 
Therefore, under the Federal Food, 
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 102 is amended as follows: 
PART 102—COMMON OR USUAL 
NAME FOR NONSTANDARDIZED FOODS 
■1. The authority citation for part 102 
continues to read as follows: 
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 343, 371. 
■2. In § 102.50 revise the table to read 
as follows: 
§ 102.50 Crabmeat. 
* * * * * 
Scientific name of crab Common or usual name 
of crabmeat 
Chionoecetes opilio, 
Chionoecetes tanneri, 
Chionoecetes bairdii, and Chionoecetes angulatus.Snow crabmeat. 
Erimacrus isenbeckii ....... Korean variety crabmeat 
or Kegani crabmeat. 
Lithodes aequispinus ...... Golden King crabmeat. 
Paralithodes brevipes ..... King crabmeat or 
Hanasaki crabmeat. 
Paralithodes 
camtschaticus and Paralithodes platypus.King crabmeat. 
Dated: April 27, 2018. 
Leslie Kux, 
Associate Commissioner for Policy. 
[FR Doc. 2018–09371 Filed 5–2–18; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
Internal Revenue Service 
26 CFR Part 54 
[TD 9744] 
RIN 1545–BJ45, 1545–BJ50, 1545–BJ62, 
1545–BJ57 
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 
Employee Benefits Security 
Administration 
29 CFR Part 2590 
RIN 1210–AB72 
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 
HUMAN SERVICES 
45 CFR Parts 144, 146, and 147 
[CMS–9993–N] 
RIN 0938–AS56 
Clarification of Final Rules for 
Grandfathered Plans, Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, Dependent Coverage, Appeals, and Patient Protections Under the Affordable Care Act 
AGENCY : Internal Revenue Service, 
Department of the Treasury; Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor; and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services. 
ACTION : Final rule; clarification. 
SUMMARY : On November 18, 2015, the 
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Treasury (the Departments) published a final rule in the Federal Register titled ‘‘Final Rules 
for Grandfathered Plans, Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, Dependent Coverage, Appeals, and Patient Protections Under the Affordable Care Act’’ (the November 2015 final rule), regarding, in part, the coverage of emergency services by non- grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers offering non- grandfathered group or individual health insurance coverage, including the requirement that non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers offering non-grandfathered group or individual health insurance coverage limit cost-sharing for out-of- network emergency services and, as part of that rule, pay at least a minimum amount for out-of-network emergency services. The American College of 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:59 May 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM 03MYR1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES