### 7582 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 27 / Monday, February 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

8. Importation and Exportation. All importation and exportation of PB–22, 5F–PB–22, AB–FUBINACA, or ADB– PINACA must be in compliance with 21 U.S.C. 952, 953, 957, 958, and in accordance with 21 CFR part 1312 as of February 10, 2014.

9. Quota. Only registered manufacturers may manufacture PB–22, 5F–PB–22, AB–FUBINACA, or ADB– PINACA in accordance with a quota assigned pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 826 and in accordance with 21 CFR part 1303.

10. Criminal Liability. Any activityinvolving PB-22, 5F-PB-22, ABFUBINACA, or ADB-PINACA not authorized by, or in violation of the CSA, occurring as of February 10, 2014 is unlawful, and may subject the person to administrative, civil, and/or criminal sanctions. Regulatory Matters

Section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h), provides for an expedited temporary scheduling action where such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. As provided in this subsection, the Attorney General may, by order, schedule a substance in schedule I on a temporary basis. Such an order may not be issued before the expiration of 30 days from (1) the publication of a notice in the Federal Register of the intention to issue such order and the grounds upon which such order is to be issued, and (2) the date that notice of a proposed temporary scheduling order is transmitted to the Assistant Secretary of HHS. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1).

Inasmuch as section 201(h) of the CSA directs that temporary scheduling actions be issued by order and sets forth the procedures by which such orders are to be issued, the DEA believes that the notice and comment requirements of section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, do not apply to this temporary scheduling action. In the alternative, even assuming that this action might be subject to section 553 of the APA, the Deputy Administrator finds that there is good cause to forgo the notice and comment requirements of section 553, as any further delays in the process for issuance of temporary scheduling orders would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest in view of the manifest urgency to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. Further, the DEA believes that this temporary scheduling action final order is not a ‘‘rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), and, accordingly, is not subject to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The requirements for the preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. 603(a) are not applicable where, as here, the DEA is not required by section 553 of the APA or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking.

Additionally, this action is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), section 3(f), and, accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

This action will not 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. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) it is determined that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Pursuant to section 808(2) of the Congressional Review Act (CRA), ‘‘any rule for which an agency for good cause finds. . .that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, shall take effect at such time as the Federal agency promulgating the rule determines.’’ 5 U.S.C. 808(2). It is in the public interest to schedule these substances immediately because they pose a public health risk. This temporary scheduling action is taken pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(h), which is specifically designed to enable the DEA to act in an expeditious manner to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety from new or designer drugs or abuse of those drugs. 21 U.S.C. 811(h) exempts the temporary scheduling order from standard notice and comment rulemaking procedures to ensure that the process moves swiftly. For the same reasons that underlie 21 U.S.C. 811(h), that is, the DEA’s need to move quickly to place these substances into schedule I because they pose a threat to public health, it would be contrary to the public interest to delay implementation of the temporary scheduling order. Therefore, in accordance with section 808(2) of the CRA, this order shall take effect immediately upon its publication.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308

Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR part 1308 is amended as follows: **PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES** 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 1308 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted.

■ 2. Amend § 1308.11 by adding paragraphs (h)(15) through (h)(18) to read as follows:

**§ 1308.11 Schedule I.**
* * * * *

(h) * * * (15) Quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1 Hindole-3-carboxylate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers—7222 (Other names: PB-22; QUPIC)

(16) Quinolin-8-yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-

1H -indole-3-carboxylate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers—7225 (Other names: 5-fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22)

(17) N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H -indazole-3- carboxamide, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts ofisomers—7012 (Other names: ABFUBINACA)

(18) N -(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1- oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H -indazole-3- carboxamide, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts ofisomers—7035 (Other names: ADBPINACA)

Dated: February 5, 2014. Thomas M. Harrigan, Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014–02848 Filed 2–7–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4410–09–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF STATE**

**22 CFR Part 41**

**[Public Notice 8627]**

**RIN 1400–AD29**

**Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration**  **and Nationality Act, as Amended; TN Visas From NAFTA Countries** 

**AGENCY :**  State Department.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of State amends its regulation pertaining to The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), by removing the petition requirement for citizens of Mexico applying for nonimmigrant visa classification as NAFTA professionals. The rule reflects changes to documentary requirements authorized under the Immigration and Nationality Act, in implementation of NAFTA.


### 7583 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 27 / Monday, February 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

**DATES :**  This rule is effective February 10, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Paul-Anthony L. Magadia, U.S. Department of State, Office of Legislation and Regulations, CA/VO/L/ R, 600 19th Street NW., SA–17, Room 12–526B, Washington, DC 20522, 202–
485–7641 or magadiapl@state.gov

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The United States, Canada, and Mexico entered into The North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA) (Section D of Annex 1603) in 1994, following enactment of the NAFTA Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 21). NAFTA includes provisions for the entry of certain citizens of each respective signatory country into the country of either of the two others as ‘‘professionals.’’ To gain entry as ‘‘professionals,’’ such citizens must meet the qualification criteria for a profession listed in Appendix 1603.D.1, and be seeking temporary entry to engage in a business activity pursuant to that profession.

Section 214(e)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides for a citizen of Canada or Mexico, and the spouse and children, if accompanying or following to join, to be treated as if seeking classification, or classifiable, as a nonimmigrant under INA section 101(a)(15). Section 214(e)(3) of the INA incorporates commitments made in NAFTA Appendix 1603.D.4, directing the Attorney General to establish an annual numerical limit for citizens of Mexico seeking temporary entry to engage in such business activity in the United States. INA section 214(e)(4) establishes conditions to be satisfied before the Secretary of Homeland Security, as successor to the Attorney General, may eliminate the numerical limit. At midnight, on December 31, 2003, the Secretary exercised this authority, and, as of January 1, 2004, eliminated the limitation of 5,500 and the requirement for a petition, which was needed solely for purposes of enforcing the limitation. This change to 22 CFR part 41 will provide consistency in the regulations of both departments governing temporary entry of NAFTA professionals.

A citizen of Mexico wishing to come to the United States in TN classification no longer needs an approved petition to meet the qualification requirements, but may apply directly to the embassy or consulate abroad for a visa. The consular officer will adjudicate eligibility for TN classification and, upon approval and issuance of a visa, the applicant may apply to the Department of Homeland Security for admission to the United States under TN status. Regulatory Findings

Administrative Procedure Act

The Department of State is of the opinion that a rulemaking that implements treaty provisions (in this case, NAFTA) is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and is exempt from sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554 (adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Since this rule is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 553, the provisions of section 553(d) do not apply to this rulemaking.

In addition, this rulemaking conforms the Department of State rule to the corresponding rule administered by the Department of Homeland Security, 8 CFR 214.6(e). This eliminates ambiguity; therefore, a notice and comment period for this rule would be impractical and unnecessary. This rule is effective upon publication. Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business

Because this rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and import markets.

Executive Order 12866

The Department of State has reviewed this rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department of State does not consider this rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order, since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism

This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform

The Department has reviewed the rule in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden. Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35. List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41

Aliens, Immigration, Nonimmigrant Visas.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, 22 CFR part 41 is amended as follows:

**PART 41—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Pub. L. 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681–795 through 2681–801; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108–458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109–295).

■ 2. Section 41.59 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), and (b) and removing paragraph (a)(4).

The revisions read as follows:

**§ 41.59 Professionals under the North American Free Trade Agreement.** 

(a) * * * (2) The alien shall have presented to the consular officer sufficient evidence of an offer of employment in the United


### 7584 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 27 / Monday, February 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

States requiring employment of a person in a professional capacity consistent with NAFTA Chapter 16 Annex 1603 Appendix 1603.D.1 and sufficient evidence that the alien possesses the credentials of that profession as listed in said appendix; or

(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.

(b) Visa validity. The period of validity of a visa issued pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section may not exceed the period established on a reciprocal basis.

* * * * *

Dated: January 22, 2014. Janice L. Jacobs, Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2014–02674 Filed 2–7–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4710–06–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY** 

**Coast Guard**

**33 CFR Part 117**

**[Docket No. USCG–2014–0037]**

**Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bishop Cut, Near Stockton, CA** 

**AGENCY :**  Coast Guard, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

**SUMMARY :**  The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the San Joaquin County highway bridge, across Bishop Cut, mile 1.0 near Stockton, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow PG&E Company to temporarily interrupt electric service to the area while installing new overhead equipment. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period.

**DATES :**  This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on February 12, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  The docket for this deviation, [USCG–2014–0037], is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510– 437–3516, email David.H.Sulouff@ uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The County of San Joaquin Public Works Department has requested a temporary change to the operation of the San Joaquin County highway bridge, mile 1.0, over Bishop Cut, near Stockton, CA. The drawbridge navigation span provides approximately 6 feet vertical clearance above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.143, the draw opens on signal if at least 12 hours notice is given to the San Joaquin County Department of Public Works at Stockton. Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational.

The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on February 12, 2014 to allow PG&E Company to install new overhead equipment in the vicinity. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.

Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at anytime. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies, and Disappointment Slough can be used as an alternate route for vessels unable to pass through the bridge in the closed position. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

Dated: January 29, 2014. D.H. Sulouff, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014–02815 Filed 2–7–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND**  **SECURITY**

**Coast Guard**

**33 CFR Part 165**

**[Docket Number-USCG–2013–0994]**

**RIN 1625–AA87**

**Security Zone; Mississippi River, New Orleans, LA** 

**AGENCY :**  Coast Guard, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Temporary final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Captain of the Port of New Orleans (COTP New Orleans), under the authority of the Magnuson Act, established a Moving Security Zone on the Mississippi river from mile marker 90.0 to mile marker 106.0 above head of passes (AHP), extending 100 yards in all directions from vessels being escorted by one or more Coast Guard asset or other federal, state, or local law enforcement agency assets. The COTP New Orleans will inform the public of the existence or status of the security zones around escorted vessels in the regulated area by Marine Safety Information Bulletins or Broadcast Notice to Mariners. This moving security zone is necessary to protect vessels deemed to be in need of escort protection by the COTP New Orleans for security reasons.

**DATES :**  This rule is effective in the Federal Register on February 10, 2014 and effective with actual notice for purposes of enforcement on December 31, 2013 through April 14, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Documents indicated in this preamble are parts of docket [USCG– 2013–0994] and are available online at www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you have questions on this temporary rule, call Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) Kelly Denning, Sector New Orleans, at (504) 365–2392 or Kelly.K.Denning@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Table of Acronyms

AHP Above Head of Passes COTP Captain of the Port