Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 38 / Monday, February 26, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 13979 

34See 18 CFR 385.602 (2023). For example, the 

reforms we announce today will not affect the 

settlement process during an Order to Show Cause 

proceeding stemming from a Part 1b investigation. 

35See generally, N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 

116 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2006). 

C. Other Considerations and 

Clarifications 

24. The settlement authority process 

and enhancements detailed in this 

policy statement apply only to the 

process by which the Commission 

resolves investigations conducted by 

Enforcement staff pursuant to 18 CFR 

part 1b, including investigations that 

relate to violations of the mandatory 

Reliability Standards. The reforms 

discussed herein do not change the 

process by which parties to a docketed 

proceeding pending before the 

Commission or set for hearing submit 

settlements to the Commission for 

consideration,34 nor do they affect the 

process by which the Commission 

reviews proposed penalties (including 

those agreed to by settlement) imposed 

by NERC and/or the Regional Entities 

for violations of the Reliability 

Standards.35

III. Conclusion 

25. As a Commission, we are always 

striving to responsibly implement our 

enforcement authorities, and to that 

end, to continually improve and 

enhance our enforcement policies and 

procedures to better serve the public. 

Consistent with that goal, we issue this 

policy statement and hereby streamline 

our settlement process by eliminating 

the requirement that Enforcement staff 

seek settlement authority from the 

Commission prior to initiating 

settlement negotiations, and instead 

grant new discretion to the Director of 

Enforcement to authorize the 

commencement of settlement 

negotiations. We believe these reforms 

will result in more effective and 

efficient resolutions of part 1b 

investigations by settlement. 

IV. Document Availability 

26. In addition to publishing the full 

text of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested parties an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the internet through the 

Commission’s homepage (https://

www.ferc.gov). 

27. From the Commission’s homepage 

on the internet, this information is 

available on eLibrary. The full text of 

this document is available on eLibrary 

in PDF and Microsoft Word format for 

viewing, printing, and/or downloading. 

To access this document in eLibrary, 

type the docket number excluding the 

last three digits of this document in the 

docket number field. 

28. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the Commission’s website 

during normal business hours from the 

Commission’s Online Support at (202) 

502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) 

or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, 

or the Public Reference Room at (202) 

502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email 

the Public Reference Room at public.

referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

V. Effective Date 

29. This policy statement is effective 

February 26, 2024. 

By the Commission. 

Issued: February 15, 2024. 

Debbie-Anne A. Reese, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03609 Filed 2–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 1150 

[Docket No. FDA–2012–N–0920] 

User Fees; Technical Amendment 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

(HHS). 

ACTION: Final rule; technical 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or Agency) is 

amending its regulations to update a 

link regarding user fee disputes. This 

technical amendment is nonsubstantive. 

DATES: This rule is effective February 

26, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nate 

Mease and Tamika Hopkins, Center for 

Tobacco Products, Food and Drug 

Administration, Document Control 

Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., 

Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD 

20993–0002, 1–877–287–1373, email: 

CTPRegulations@fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is 

amending § 1150.15 (21 CFR 1150.15) to 

update the web address for information 

regarding user fee disputes. FDA’s user 

fee dispute regulations currently link to 

FDA’s general web page on tobacco 

products. FDA is revising § 1150.15 to 

specifically direct firms to FDA’s web 

page on tobacco product user fees by 

replacing ‘‘https://www.fda.gov/ 

tobacco-products’’ with ‘‘https://

www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ 

manufacturing/tobacco-user-fees’’ in 

two places. 

Publication of this document 

constitutes final action on these changes 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). The APA 

generally exempts rules from the 

requirements of notice and comment 

rulemaking when an agency ‘‘for good 

cause finds (and incorporates the 

finding and a brief statement of reasons 

therefor in the rules issued) that notice 

and public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest’’ (5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B)). 

FDA has determined that notice and 

public comment are unnecessary 

because this amendment to the 

regulation provides only technical or 

non-substantive, ministerial changes to 

specify the location of information on 

FDA’s web page regarding tobacco 

product user fee program. Such 

technical, non-substantive changes are 

‘‘routine determination[s], insignificant 

in nature and impact, and 

inconsequential to the industry and to 

the public.’’ (Mack Trucks, Inc. v. EPA, 

682 F.3d 87, 94 (D.C. Cir. 2012)) 

(quotation marks and citation omitted). 

Accordingly, FDA for good cause finds 

that notice and public procedure 

thereon are unnecessary for changing 

the cited FDA web page on tobacco user 

fees. 

In addition, FDA finds good cause for 

these amendments to become effective 

on the date of publication of this action. 

The APA allows an effective date of 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 amendments do not impose any new 

regulatory requirements on affected 

parties. As a result, affected parties do 

not need time to prepare before the rule 

takes effect. Therefore, FDA finds good 

cause for this correction to become 

effective on the date of publication of 

this action. 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1150 

Tobacco products, User fees. 

Therefore, under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 

authority delegated to the Commissioner 

of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 1150 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 1150—USER FEES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1150 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 371, 387a, 387b, 387i, 

387s, 21 CFR 1100.1. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
13980 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 38 / Monday, February 26, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 2. Amend § 1150.15 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(4) and (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1150.15 Disputes. 

(a) * * * 

(4) Sent to the address found on our 

website (https://www.fda.gov/tobaccoproducts/manufacturing/tobacco-userfees). 

* * * * * 

(d) A request for further Agency 

review under § 10.75 of this chapter 

may be submitted. Such a request must 

be submitted in writing by the domestic 

manufacturer or importer and received 

by FDA within 30 days from the date on 

FDA’s response. The request for further 

Agency review must be legible, in 

English, and submitted to the address 

found on our website (https://

www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ 

manufacturing/tobacco-user-fees). 

Dated: February 20, 2024. 

Lauren K. Roth, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03777 Filed 2–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 501 

Authorization To Manufacture and 

Distribute Postage Evidencing 

Systems 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is 

amending its Postage Evidencing 

Systems (PES) regulations to ensure 

compliance for Automated 

Clearinghouse or ACH payment 

transactions and to clarify obligations 

related to all payments. These changes 

require the applicable resetting 

company (RC) and PC Postage provider 

to comply with the latest NACHA rules 

published by the North American 

Clearing House Association for ACH 

transactions. These changes also require 

the applicable RC and PC Postage 

provider to obtain and store an 

agreement with each customer utilizing 

ACH debit as a payment method. 

Failure to comply may result in 

revocation of access to applicable Postal 

Service ACH programs. 

DATES: Effective March 27, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Douglas Graham, Banking Manager, 

United States Postal Service, 475 

L’Enfant Plaza SW, RM 8134, 

Washington, DC 20260. Phone: (202) 

268–2188. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal 

Service issued proposed revisions to 39 

CFR part 501, set forth in the Federal 

Register on November 20, 2023 (Vol. 88, 

No. 222). It proposed amending the 

Postage Evidencing Systems regulations 

to ensure compliance for Automated 

Clearinghouse or ACH payment 

transactions and to clarify obligations 

related to all payments. Two sets of 

comments were received in response to 

the Federal Register Notice from 

industry participants. 

NACHA Rules Compliance 

Industry Comments 

The proposal that PES providers must 

comply with NACHA rules received 

comments highlighting the need for 

clarification on which version of the 

NACHA rules will apply, as the rules 

are regularly updated. The commentors 

suggest including a provision for a grace 

period for PES providers to adopt and 

comply with future updates, which 

could either be fixed, or flexible and 

proportionate to the scope and 

complexity of future changes. 

Postal Service Response 

The rule will be re-worded to specify 

‘‘must comply with the most recently 

published edition of NACHA Operating 

Rules & Guidelines, published by 

NACHA annually.’’ It is not the 

intention through this rulemaking to 

alter or supersede NACHA rules, but to 

follow existing NACHA rules and 

compliance that industry should 

reasonably understand and expect. 

Under this approach, the Postal Service 

cannot provide NACHA compliance 

exemptions as any entity involved in 

ACH related activity must already 

comply with NACHA rules, therefore 

the Postal Service will also not specify 

‘‘sections to comply with’’ nor ‘‘grace 

periods’’. Changes to the NACHA 

Operating Rules and Guidelines 

typically provide for future dated 

requirements and therefore an 

implementation period is normally 

provided within the NACHA rules. 

NACHA Attestation of Compliance 

Industry Comments 

Commentors expressed opposition to 

the proposal’s requirement for an 

annual written attestation of compliance 

for PES providers. One commentor 

opined that the requirement is 

unnecessary, since PES providers are 

already required to provide the Postal 

Service with System and Organizational 

Controls Reports (SOC 1 and SOC 2) 

that incorporate NACHA compliance. 

The proposed rule’s requirement of a 

written plan to address any 

noncompliance of NACHA rules is 

duplicative of the existing requirement 

for a remediation plan as a part of the 

SOC process. If the requirement is 

retained, one commentor recommends 

that the Postal Service should provide 

the text of the attestation or clarify what 

the attestation must contain. 

Postal Service Response 

The requirement to provide an annual 

written attestation of compliance will be 

removed. 

ACH Debit Agreement 

Industry Comments 

Commentors expressed concerns 

about the proposed rule’s new recordkeeping requirements for ACH 

agreements for PES providers. One 

commenter suggested revising the 

requirements to minimize 

administrative burden and focus only 

on essential information. This 

commenter proposes accommodating 

customer agreements predating the rule 

by either grandfathering them for a 

specified period or providing an 

extended grace period, such as 12 to 18 

months, for historic account 

information. The comment also argues 

against duplicative elements, such as 

the need for bank address information 

for every customer agreement. Another 

commenter also supports the idea of a 

grace period for providers to obtain and 

document the required contracts and 

suggest making a bank address an 

optional requirement, since it can be 

derived from the Routing/ABA number. 

Postal Service Response 

1. Regarding supplying the bank 

address information, it is agreed, and 

that data element requirement will be 

removed. 

2. Regarding requiring signature 

evidence of termination, it is agreed, 

and that data element requirement will 

be removed. 

3. To comply with NACHA rules, the 

ability to provide a copy of the ACH 

Debit upon request must already be in 

place, therefore ‘‘grandfathering’’ an 

exemption to this requirement is not an 

option. All customers of the providers 

must have an ACH Debit Agreement on 

file with the provider. All terminated 

ACH Debit Agreements must have a 

termination date noted on the agreement 

and the agreement must be kept on file 

for at least 2 years after the termination 

date. 

4. It is agreed that an ACH Debit 

Agreement ‘‘form (hard copy or 

electronic)’’ revision period will be 

provided to update agreement ‘‘forms’’ 

to include the minimum data elements 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES