Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 2635 

(c)(6)(v) of this section. The software was 

intended to be innovative because it would 

provide a reduction in cost or improvement 

in speed that is substantial and economically 

significant. In addition, X’s development 

activities involved significant economic risk 

in that X committed substantial resources to 

the development and there was substantial 

uncertainty that because of technical risk, 

such resources would be recovered within a 

reasonable period. Finally, at the time X 

undertook the development of the system, 

software meeting X’s requirements was not 

commercially available for use by X. 

Example 13. Internal use software; 

application of the high threshold of 

innovation test—(i) Facts. X, a multinational 

manufacturer, wants to install enterprise 

resource planning (ERP) system that runs off 

a single database. However, to implement the 

ERP system, X determines that it must 

integrate part of its old system with the new 

because the ERP system does not have a 

particular function that X requires for its 

business. The two systems are general and 

administrative software systems. The systems 

have mutual incompatibilities. The 

integration, if successful, would provide a 

reduction in cost and improvement in speed 

that is substantial and economically 

significant. At the time X undertook this 

project, there was no commercial application 

available with such a capability. X is 

uncertain regarding the appropriate design of 

the interface software. However, X knows 

that given a reasonable period of time to 

experiment with various designs, X would be 

able to determine the appropriate design 

necessary to meet X’s technical requirements 

and would recover the substantial resources 

that X commits to the development of the 

system within a reasonable period. At the 

beginning of the development, X does not 

intend to develop the software for sale. The 

software does not enable X to interact with 

third parties or allow third parties to initiate 

functions or review data. 

(ii) Conclusion. The software is internal 

use software because it is developed 

primarily for use in a general and 

administrative function. X’s activities do not 

satisfy the high threshold of innovation test 

of paragraph (c)(6)(v) of this section. 

Although the software meets the 

requirements of paragraphs (c)(6)(v)(A)(1) 

and (3) of this section, X’s development 

activities did not involve significant 

economic risk under paragraph (c)(6)(v)(A)(2) 

of this section. X did not have substantial 

uncertainty, because of technical risk, that 

the resources committed to the project would 

be recovered within a reasonable period. 

* * * * * 

(e) Effective/applicability dates. Other 

than paragraph (c)(6) of this section, this 

section is applicable for taxable years 

ending on or after December 31, 2003. 

Paragraph (c)(6) of this section is 

applicable for taxable years ending on or 

after the date of publication of the 

Treasury decision adopting these rules 

as final regulations in the Federal 

Register. Notwithstanding the 

prospective effective date, the IRS will 

not challenge return positions 

consistent with these proposed 

regulations for taxable years ending on 

or after the date these proposed 

regulations are published. For taxable 

years ending before the date these 

proposed regulations are published in 

the Federal Register, taxpayers may 

choose to follow either all of the 

internal use software provisions of 

§ 1.41–4(c)(6) in TD 8930 or all of the 

internal use software provisions in the 

2001 proposed regulations. 

John Dalrymple, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00690 Filed 1–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0781; FRL–9920–53– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District and 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD) and 

the Ventura County Air Pollution 

Control District (VCAPCD) portions of 

the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emissions from delayed coking units 

used in petroleum refining, and sulfur 

dioxide primary emissions from fossil 

fuel combustion. We are proposing to 

approve local rules to regulate these 

emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by February 19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2014–0781 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Shears, EPA Region IX, (213) 

244–1810, shears.james@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rules: SCAQMD Rule 1114, Petroleum 

Refinery Coking Operations, and 

VCAPCD Rule 54, Sulfur Compounds. 

In the Rules and Regulations section of 

this Federal Register, we are approving 

these local rules in a direct final action 

without prior proposal because we 

believe these SIP revisions are not 

controversial. If we receive adverse 

comments, however, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal of the direct final 

rule and address the comments in 

subsequent action based on this 

proposed rule. Please note that if we 

receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2636 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: December 2, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00642 Filed 1–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 218 

[Docket No. 140909771–4771–01] 

RIN 0648–BE51 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Joint 

Logistics Over-the-Shore Training 

Activities in Virginia and North 

Carolina 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule; request 

for comments and information. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for 

authorization to take marine mammals 

incidental to the Joint Logistics Overthe-Shore (JLOTS) training activities 

conducted in Virginia and North 

Carolina, from June 2015 through June 

2020. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is 

requesting comments on its proposal to 

issue regulations and a five-year Letter 

of Authorization (LOA) to the Navy to 

incidentally harass marine mammals. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than February 19, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by NOAA–NMFS–2015–0004, 

by either of the following methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal http://

www.regulations.gov. 

• Hand delivery of mailing of paper, 

disk, or CD–ROM comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http://

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Work, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shane Guan, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability 

A copy of the Navy’s application may 

be obtained by visiting the internet at: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm. The Navy’s Draft 

Environmental Assessment for Joint 

Logistics Over-the-Shore Training (EA) 

will be made available to the public on 

January 6, 2015, during the comment 

period for this proposed rule. 

Documents cited in this notice may also 

be viewed, by appointment, during 

regular business hours, at the 

aforementioned address. 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce to allow, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

issued or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

authorization is provided to the public 

for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s), will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

subsistence uses (where relevant), and if 

the permissible methods of taking and 

requirements pertaining to the 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of 

such takings are set forth. NMFS has 

defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 

216.103 as ‘‘. . . an impact resulting 

from the specified activity that cannot 

be reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act of 2004 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108–136) 

removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and 

‘‘specified geographic region’’ 

limitations indicated above and 

amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ 

as applied to ‘‘military readiness 

activity’’ to read as follows (Section 

3(18)(B) of the MMPA: ‘‘(i) Any act that 

injures or has the significant potential to 

injure a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild [Level A 

Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs 

or is likely to disturb a marine mammal 

or marine mammal stock in the wild by 

causing disruption of natural behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering, to a point where 

such behavioral patterns are abandoned 

or significantly altered [Level B 

Harassment].’’ 

Summary of Request 

On August 20, 2014, NMFS received 

an application from the Navy requesting 

a letter of authorization (LOA) for the 

take of bottlenose and Atlantic spotted 

dolphins incidental to the Navy’s JLOTS 

training activities in nearshore waters at 

the Joint Expeditionary Base (JEB) Little 

Creek-Fort Story in Virginia and at 

Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. The 

Navy is requesting regulations that 

would establish a process for 

authorizing take, via a 5-year LOA, of 

marine mammals incidental to training 

activities. These activities are classified 

as military readiness activities. The 

Navy states that these activities may 

result in take of marine mammals from 

noise from temporary pier construction 

associated with the JLOTS training 

activities. The Navy requests to take 

bottlenose and Atlantic spotted 

dolphins by Level B harassment. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

JLOTS training is the movement of 

cargo and personnel from ships to shore 

in areas that do not have existing fixed 

port facilities. Among the several 

coordinated exercises of the JLOTS 

training, the only activity that has the 

potential to harass marine mammals is 

the construction of the Elevated 

Causeway System, Modular [ELCAS 

(M)] by introducing noise into the water. 

The ELCAS (M) is a temporary pier 

constructed from the beach into the 

water past the surf zone. It provides a 

means of delivering containers, 

vehicles, and bulk cargo ashore without 

lighterage craft having to enter the surf 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS