89922 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Agency Response: The Agency agrees. 

The Agency supports these changes as 

allowing additional flexibility for 

Centers to meet the requirements for the 

BOD. 

Sec. 4284.1020 Applicant Eligibility 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

additional space should be created for 

community colleges to administer AIC 

awards. 

Agency Response: The Agency 

disagrees. There is no provision in the 

authorizing statute to give preference or 

additional accommodation to 

community colleges. These community 

colleges are eligible to apply as long as 

they meet the requirements identified in 

the regulation. 

Sec. 4284.1021 Ultimate Beneficiary 

Eligibility 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

the program should allow Centers to 

provide producer services to all valueadded producers and processors 

regardless of ownership structure and 

percentage of ownership of the 

agricultural commodity. 

Agency Response: The Agency 

disagrees. First, the authorizing statute 

for the program restricts Center 

assistance to only agricultural 

producers. Second, the program 

supports the same objectives that the 

VAPG program does, which are to help 

agricultural producers increase their 

revenue and customer base for the 

value-added agricultural products they 

make from the agricultural commodities 

that they grow or raise. Allowing 

assistance to go to organizations that 

have minority ownership from 

agricultural producers or to agricultural 

producers who are buying the majority 

of the agricultural commodity needed 

for the value-added agricultural product 

dilutes the effect of the program for 

agricultural producers, who are the 

legally-mandated beneficiary. 

Sec. 4284.1022 Project Eligibility 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

the changes to establish a minimum 

award amount, a period of performance, 

and limitations on contracts with other 

Centers adds greater clarity for 

applicants and that the minimum and 

maximum award amounts are 

appropriate for three-year periods of 

performance. 

Agency Response: The Agency agrees. 

The Agency supports adding clarity for 

applicants and establishing appropriate 

award amounts. 

Sec. 4284.1031 Application 

Requirements 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

the change to streamline the 

requirements for an application from a 

narrative format to a form should make 

applying to the program clearer and less 

burdensome. 

Agency Response: The Agency agrees. 

Two primary goals of this rulemaking 

effort were to clarify requirements and 

make the application process less 

burdensome for applicants. 

Sec. 4284.1040 Application Processing 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

reducing duplication in the merit 

evaluation criteria is helpful to 

applicants. 

Agency Response: The Agency agrees. 

The Agency believes that reducing 

duplication will streamline the 

application and merit evaluation 

process. 

Sec. 4284.1051 Notification of 

Successful Applicants 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

moving the burden for some 

requirements, such as the verification of 

matching funds and demonstrating that 

the Center has a qualified BOD, from the 

application phase to the award phase 

will significantly reduce the burden for 

all applicants and especially for 

successful applicants. 

Agency Response: The Agency agrees. 

The Agency believes that moving this 

burden will streamline the application 

process for all applicants. However, it 

notes that the requirements still exist at 

the time of application; only the need to 

verify or demonstrate that the applicant 

meets the requirement has shifted from 

the application to the award phase. 

No change to the rulemaking is 

necessary at this time. The Agency 

appreciates the comments received. The 

Agency confirms the final rule without 

change. 

Kathryn E. Dirksen Londrigan, 

Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative 

Service, USDA Rural Development. 

[FR Doc. 2024–26201 Filed 11–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement 

30 CFR Parts 250 and 290 

[Docket ID: BSEE–2023–0014 EEEE500000 

256E1700D2 ET1SF0000.EAQ000] 

RIN 1014–AA57 

Bonding Requirements When Filing an 

Appeal of a Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement Civil 

Penalty 

AGENCY: Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement, Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Interior (Interior) is amending 

regulations administered by the Bureau 

of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement (BSEE) regarding the 

bonding requirements for entities filing 

an appeal from a BSEE decision that 

assesses a civil penalty. The regulations 

will clarify that entities appealing a 

BSEE civil penalty decision to the 

Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) 

must have a bond covering the civil 

penalty assessment amount for the IBLA 

to have jurisdiction over the appeal. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

January 13, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions, contact Janine 

Marie Tobias at Janine.Tobias@bsee.gov 

or (202) 208–4657. For procedural 

questions, contact Kirk Malstrom at 

(703) 787–1751 or by email at regs@

bsee.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

Pursuant to the Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C. 

1350), BSEE has the delegated authority 

to assess civil penalties to certain 

entities engaged in energy exploration, 

development, and production 

operations on the Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) following certain violations 

by those entities of a statutory 

provision, regulation, order, or lease, 

license, or permit term. Interior’s 

implementing regulations for this 

authority are located at 30 CFR part 250, 

‘‘Subpart N-Outer Continental Shelf 

Civil Penalties’’ (§§ 250.1400–250.1409). 

Additional relevant regulations 

regarding the procedures for appealing 

civil penalty assessments are found at 

30 CFR part 290, ‘‘Subpart A-Bureau of 

Safety and Environmental Enforcement 

Appeal Procedures’’ (§§ 290.1–290.8). 

BSEE recently commenced a review of 

its regulations for civil penalty 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 89923 

assessment appeals. BSEE initiated this 

review following the IBLA’s July 7, 

2022, order in Petro Ventures, Inc. 

(IBLA No. 2020–48), which analyzed the 

effect of the civil penalty appeal 

bonding requirements in 30 CFR 

250.1409. This regulation, at paragraph 

(b), requires that an entity filing an 

appeal of a civil penalty assessment 

must either ‘‘[s]ubmit a surety bond in 

the amount of the penalty’’ or request 

that ‘‘your lease-specific/area-wide bond 

on file be used as the bond for the 

penalty amount.’’ When Interior 

proposed what is now 30 CFR 250.1409 

in 1999, it explained that the civil 

penalty appeal bonding requirement 

was ‘‘designed to ensure that funds will 

be available to cover the final civil 

penalty assessment if the appeal is 

denied, and to discourage any appeals 

filed for the sole purpose of delaying 

payment of that assessment.’’ 64 FR 

1930, 1966 (January 12, 1999). BSEE and 

its predecessors have consistently 

intended and understood this bonding 

requirement to operate as a condition 

precedent to an entity’s right to pursue 

an appeal. The IBLA, however, 

concluded in Petro Ventures, Inc. that 

while 30 CFR 250.1409 requires that the 

appellant have bonding covering the 

appealed civil penalty amount, the 

regulation is not phrased in such a way 

as to make it a jurisdictional 

precondition that would require 

dismissal of the appeal if the bonding 

requirement is not met. 

Accordingly, Interior is revising 30 

CFR 250.1409, ‘‘What are my appeal 

rights?,’’ and 30 CFR 290.4, ‘‘How do I 

file an appeal?’’, to effectuate the 

original intent of the bonding 

requirement by ensuring that bonding is 

a jurisdictional precondition for 

appealing a BSEE civil penalty 

assessment to the IBLA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Discussion of Public Comment on the 

Proposed Rule 

II. Section-by-Section Summary 

III. Procedural Matters 

I. Discussion of Public Comment on the 

Proposed Rule 

BSEE published a proposed rule in 

late 2023 with revisions to 30 CFR 

250.1409 and 30 CFR 290.4. 88 FR 

86285 (Dec. 13, 2023). BSEE received 

one comment on the proposed rule 

related to Interior’s determination under 

E.O. 13175 that this rule will not have 

substantial direct effects on Tribal 

Nations or Alaska Natives, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Tribal Nations or 

Alaska Natives, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Tribal Nations 

or Alaska Natives. The commenter 

stated that ‘‘there is no indication you 

have consulted with Tribal Nations or 

Alaska Natives in order to come to this 

conclusion.’’ Here, BSEE determined 

that this is an administrative update to 

current policy with no substantial direct 

effects on federally recognized Indian 

Tribes, Alaska Native Claims Settlement 

Act (‘‘ANCSA’’) Corporations, or the 

Native Hawaiian Community pursuant 

to the criteria in E.O. 13175, and that 

this action does not have Tribal 

implications pursuant to Interior’s 

consultation policies. BSEE evaluated 

this proposed ruleunder the 

Department’s consultation policy in 

Departmental Manual part 512 chapters 

4 and 5, and under the criteria in E.O. 

13175. Accordingly, BSEE did not 

initiate a consultation process for the 

proposed rule. 

II. Section-by-Section Summary 

What are my appeal rights? (§ 250.1409) 

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions 

BSEE proposed to change the 

introductory sentence of § 250.1409(b) 

from ‘‘If you file an appeal, you must 

either:’’ to ‘‘In order to file an appeal, 

you must perform one of the following 

actions within the 60-day appeal period 

to have your appeal heard:’’. BSEE 

proposed to move existing § 250.1409(d) 

to a new § 250.1409(e). The proposed 

§ 250.1409(d) states that ‘‘the bonding 

requirement in paragraph (b) of this 

section is a jurisdictional precondition 

for a civil penalty appeal.’’ Together, 

these revised provisions would 

effectuate the intended functions of 

BSEE’s bonding requirements for filing 

and maintaining a civil penalty appeal 

to the IBLA. BSEE requires bonding 

coverage for the full civil penalty 

amount of all civil penalty appeals to 

ensure that funds will be available to 

cover the civil penalty amount if the 

assessment is upheld and to discourage 

appeals filed for the sole purpose of 

delaying payment of that assessment. 

Lastly, BSEE proposed moving 

existing § 250.1409(d) to the new 

§ 250.1409(e), and revising 

§ 250.1409(d) by changing the 

introductory sentence from ‘‘If you do 

not either pay the penalty or file a 

timely appeal, BSEE will take one or 

more of the following actions:’’ to ‘‘If 

you do not either pay the penalty or 

fully satisfy the appeal requirements, 

the Department may take one or more of 

the following actions:’’. In paragraph 

(e)(1), BSEE proposed deleting ‘‘We 

will’’ and starting the sentence with 

‘‘Collect.’’ In paragraph (e)(2), BSEE 

proposed deleting ‘‘We may’’ and 

starting the sentence with ‘‘Initiate.’’ In 

paragraph (e)(3), BSEE proposed 

deleting ‘‘We may’’ and starting the 

sentence with ‘‘Bar.’’ BSEE proposed 

these edits because different entities 

within Interior may take the listed 

actions and to improve the grammatical 

structure of the overall provision. 

Summary of Final Rule Revisions 

BSEE did not receive any comments 

on the proposed revisions and includes 

the proposed revisions in the final rule 

without change. 

How do I file an appeal? (§ 290.4) 

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions 

BSEE proposed to add a new 

paragraph (c) to § 290.4. Existing § 290.4 

sets forth the items that BSEE must 

receive within 60 days after a party 

receives a decision for an appeal to be 

considered properly filed. The proposed 

paragraph (c) adds to that list: ‘‘If you 

are appealing a civil penalty assessment, 

either notification of payment of the 

penalty or documentation 

demonstrating satisfaction of the 

requirements in 30 CFR 250.1409(b).’’ 

As with the other appeal filing 

requirements in the section, it expressly 

states that the appellant ‘‘cannot extend 

the 60-day period for satisfying this 

requirement, except as specifically 

provided in 30 CFR 250.1409(d).’’ BSEE 

proposed these additions to ensure 

awareness of, and consistency with, the 

requirements in the proposed 

§ 250.1409; to ensure that appealing 

entities timely provide BSEE with 

documentation demonstrating 

compliance with § 250.1409; and to 

further emphasize the nature of the 

bonding requirement as a jurisdictional 

precondition to maintenance of an 

appeal. 

Summary of Final Rule Revisions 

BSEE did not receive any comments 

on the proposed revisions and includes 

the proposed revisions in the final rule 

without change. 

III. Procedural Matters 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) 

When an agency issues a rulemaking 

proposal, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA) requires the agency to ‘‘prepare 

and make available for public comment 

an initial regulatory flexibility analysis’’ 

that will ‘‘describe the impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities.’’ (5 

U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of the RFA 

allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu 

of preparing an analysis, if the proposed 

rulemaking is not expected to have a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
89924 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

BSEE estimates that at least 80 entities 

(lessees, grant holders, and operators) 

are subject to this rule, of which 

approximately 60 percent are small 

according to the U.S. Small Business 

Administration size standards based on 

each firm’s North American Industry 

Classification System code, number of 

employees, and annual revenues. 

Therefore, BSEE has determined that 

this rule applies to a substantial number 

of small entities. 

However, BSEE has determined that 

the impact on entities affected by the 

rule is not significant. The provisions of 

this regulation only align the language 

of the regulations with BSEE’s 

longstanding understanding of the 

effects of the existing requirement. 

Existing regulations have long required 

satisfaction of bonding requirements for 

appeals of civil penalty assessments, 

and these revisions only clarify the 

procedural effects of noncompliance 

with that requirement. They do not add 

any cost burdens to entities that would 

be subject to the rule. Accordingly, 

Interior hereby certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act/Congressional Review Act 

(5 U.S.C. 801–808) 

This rule does not meet the criteria 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This rule: 

(1) Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more; 

(2) Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; and 

(3) Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

This rule does not generate an annual 

economic effect of $100 million or more; 

cause major price increases for 

consumers, businesses, governments, or 

geographic regions; or degrade 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S. businesses to compete against 

foreign businesses. Its effects are purely 

administrative, legal, and procedural. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

This rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments, or the private sector 

of more than $189 million per year. The 

rule does not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or Tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act is not required. 

Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 

12630) 

Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this 

rule does not have significant takings 

implications. The rule is not a 

governmental action capable of 

interference with constitutionally 

protected property rights. A takings 

implication assessment is not required. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

Under the criteria in section 1 of E.O. 

13132, this rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a federalism summary 

impact statement. To the extent that 

State and local governments have a role 

in Outer Continental Shelf activities, 

this rule will not affect that role. 

Therefore, a federalism summary impact 

statement is not required. 

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

This rule complies with the 

requirements of E.O. 12988. 

Specifically, this rule: 

(1) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) 

requiring that all regulations be 

reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ambiguity and be written to minimize 

litigation; and 

(2) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) 

requiring that all regulations be written 

in clear language and contain clear legal 

standards. 

Consultation and Coordination With 

Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175) 

BSEE strives to strengthen its 

government-to-government 

relationships with federally recognized 

Indian Tribes through a commitment to 

consultation with Tribes and 

recognition of their right to selfgovernance and Tribal sovereignty. We 

are also respectful of our responsibilities 

for consultation with ANCSA 

Corporations. BSEE has reviewed this 

rule pursuant to the criteria in E.O. 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (dated 

November 6, 2000), and Interior’s 

policies and procedures for consultation 

with Indian Tribes and ANCSA 

Corporations. (512 Departmental 

Manual 4–7). BSEE is also respectful of 

our responsibilities for consultation 

with the Native Hawaiian Community. 

BSEE follows the Department’s Office of 

Native Hawaiian Relations ‘‘Standard 

Operating Procedure for Consultation 

with the Native Hawaiian Community.’’ 

This Standard Operating Procedure 

provides that: ‘‘Congress has also 

required Federal agencies to consult 

before taking actions that have the 

potential to significantly affect Native 

Hawaiian resources, rights, or lands by 

correspondingly charging the Office 

with fully integrating the policy and 

practice of meaningful consultation by 

such Federal agencies.’’ BSEE has 

determined that this rule will not have 

substantial direct effects on federally 

recognized Indian Tribes, ANCSA 

Corporations, or the Native Hawaiian 

Community and will not have 

substantial direct effects on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and federally recognized 

Indian Tribes, ANCSA Corporations, or 

the Native Hawaiian Community, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and federally recognized 

Indian Tribes, ANCSA Corporations, or 

the Native Hawaiian Community. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements, 

and a submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act is not 

required. We may not conduct or 

sponsor, and you are not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4347) 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. A 

detailed statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) is not required because, as a 

regulation of an administrative nature, 

this rule is covered by a categorical 

exclusion (see 43 CFR 46.210(i)). BSEE 

also determined that the rule does not 

implicate any of the extraordinary 

circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 

that would require further analysis 

under NEPA. Therefore, a detailed 

statement under NEPA is not required. 

Effects on the Nation’s Energy Supply 

(E.O. 13211) 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action under the definition in E.O. 

13211. This rule is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. A 

Statement of Energy Effects is not 

required. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 89925 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 

13563) 

E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ as amended by E.O. 14094, 

provides that OMB’s Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) will review all significant 

regulatory actions. A significant 

regulatory action is one that is likely to 

result in a rule that: 

A. Has an annual effect on the 

economy of $200 million or more 

(adjusted every 3 years by the 

Administrator of OIRA for changes in 

gross domestic product); or adversely 

affects in a material way the economy, 

a sector of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or State, local, 

territorial, or Tribal governments or 

communities; 

B. Creates a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interferes with an action 

taken or planned by another agency; 

C. Materially alters the budgetary 

impacts of entitlements, grants, user 

fees, loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

D. Raises legal or policy issues for 

which centralized review would 

meaningfully further the President’s 

priorities or the principles set forth in 

E.O. 12866. 

OIRA has concluded that this rule is 

not a significant action under E.O. 

12866. The provisions of the final rule 

will align the language of the 

regulations with BSEE’s and the 

regulated industry’s longstanding 

understanding of the effects of the 

existing requirements and will not add 

any cost burdens to entities that would 

be subject to the rule, yielding only 

procedural effects. Accordingly, BSEE 

does not anticipate that this rule will 

have an annual economic impact of 

$200 million or more or have a material 

adverse effect on the economy, a sector 

of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, public health or 

safety, the environment, or State, local, 

or Tribal governments or communities. 

This rule also will not raise novel legal 

or policy issues. 

E.O. 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review,’’ reaffirms the 

principles of E.O. 12866 while calling 

for improvements in the Nation’s 

regulatory system to promote 

predictability, to reduce uncertainty, 

and to use the best, most innovative, 

and least burdensome tools for 

achieving regulatory ends. E.O. 13563 

directs agencies to consider regulatory 

approaches that reduce burdens and 

maintain flexibility and freedom of 

choice for the public where these 

approaches are relevant, feasible, and 

consistent with regulatory objectives. 

E.O. 13563 further emphasizes that 

regulations must be based on the best 

available science and that the 

rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas. We have developed 

this rule in a manner consistent with 

these requirements. 

Effects on Environmental Justice for 

Minority and Low-Income Populations 

(E.O. 12898) 

E.O. 12898 requires Federal agencies 

to make achieving environmental justice 

part of their mission by identifying and 

addressing disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects of their programs, policies, and 

activities on minority and low-income 

populations. BSEE has determined that 

this rule will not have a 

disproportionately high or adverse 

human health or environmental effect 

on native, minority, or low-income 

communities because its provisions are 

administrative and procedural in nature 

and does not affect public safety, 

environmental protection, or OCS 

operational requirements. 

List of Subjects 

30 CFR Part 250 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Continental shelf, 

Environmental impact statements, 

Environmental protection, Government 

contracts, Investigations, Mineral 

resources, Oil and gas exploration, 

Penalties, Pipelines, Continental Shelf— 

mineral resources, Continental Shelf— 

rights-of-way, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur. 

30 CFR Part 290 

Administrative practice and 

procedure. 

This action by the Principal Deputy 

Assistant Secretary is taken herein 

pursuant to an existing delegation of 

authority. 

Steven H. Feldgus, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land 

and Minerals Management. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Department of the Interior 

amends 30 CFR parts 250 and 290 as 

follows: 

PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND 

SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE 

OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 250 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1751, 31 U.S.C. 9701, 

33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C), 43 U.S.C. 1334. 

Subpart N—Outer Continental Shelf 

Civil Penalties 

■ 2. Amend § 250.1409 by revising 

paragraphs (b) and (d) and adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 250.1409 What are my appeal rights? 

* * * * * 

(b) In order to file an appeal, you must 

perform one of the following actions 

within the 60-day appeal period to have 

your appeal heard: 

* * * * * 

(d) Satisfying the bonding 

requirement in paragraph (b) of this 

section is a jurisdictional precondition 

for a civil penalty appeal. If you have 

timely filed a request with BOEM 

pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section to use your lease-specific/areawide bond on file as the bond for the 

penalty amount, the IBLA’s jurisdiction 

over the appeal is preserved while 

BOEM’s decision on your request is 

pending. Should BOEM deny your 

request or require additional security 

pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section, 

you have 30 days to satisfy paragraph 

(b)(1) of this section or post the required 

additional security, as applicable, and 

jurisdiction is preserved during that 30- 

day period. If you fail to satisfy these 

bonding requirements, the IBLA will 

lose jurisdiction and must dismiss your 

appeal. 

(e) If you do not either pay the penalty 

or fully satisfy the appeal requirements, 

the Department may take one or more of 

the following actions: 

(1) Collect the amount you were 

assessed, plus interest, late payment 

charges, and other fees as provided by 

law, from the date you received the 

Reviewing Officer’s final decision until 

the date we receive payment; 

(2) Initiate additional enforcement, 

including, if appropriate, cancellation of 

the lease, right-of-way, license, permit, 

or approval, or the forfeiture of a bond 

under this part; or 

(3) Bar you from doing further 

business with the Federal Government 

according to Executive Orders 12549 

and 12689, and section 2455 of the 

Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 

1994, 31 U.S.C. 6101. The Department 

of the Interior’s regulations 

implementing these authorities are 

found at 43 CFR part 12, subpart D. 

PART 290—APPEAL PROCEDURES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 290 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 305; 43 U.S.C. 1334. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
89926 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Subpart A—Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement Appeal 

Procedures 

■ 4. Amend § 290.4 by: 

■ a. Removing the word ‘‘and’’ at the 

end of paragraph (a); 

■ b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, 

removing ‘‘.’’ and adding in its place ‘‘; 

and’’; and 

■ c. Adding paragraph (c). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 290.4 How do I file an appeal? 

* * * * * 

(c) If you are appealing a civil penalty 

assessment, either notification of 

payment of the penalty or 

documentation demonstrating 

satisfaction of the requirements in 30 

CFR 250.1409(b). You cannot extend the 

60-day period for satisfying this 

requirement, except as specifically 

provided in 30 CFR 250.1409(d). 

[FR Doc. 2024–26504 Filed 11–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–VH–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

31 CFR Part 548 

Publication of Belarus Sanctions 

Regulations Web General License 10 

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets 

Control, Treasury. 

ACTION: Publication of a web general 

license. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets 

Control (OFAC) is publishing a general 

license (GL) issued pursuant to the 

Belarus Sanctions Regulations: GL 10, 

which was previously made available 

on OFAC’s website. 

DATES: GL 10 was issued on December 

5, 2023. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for additional relevant 

dates. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

OFAC: Assistant Director for Licensing, 

202–622–2480; Assistant Director for 

Regulatory Affairs, 202–622–4855; or 

Assistant Director for Compliance, 202– 

622–2490 or https://ofac.treasury.gov/ 

contact-ofac. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Availability 

This document and additional 

information concerning OFAC are 

available on OFAC’s website: https://

ofac.treasury.gov. 

Background 

On December 5, 2023, OFAC issued 

GL 10 to authorize certain transactions 

otherwise prohibited by the Belarus 

Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 548. 

GL 10 was made available on OFAC’s 

website (https://ofac.treasury.gov) when 

it was issued. GL 10 is now expired. The 

text of this GL is provided below. 

OFFICE OF FOREIGN ASSETS 

CONTROL 

Belarus Sanctions Regulations 

31 CFR Part 548 

GENERAL LICENSE NO. 10 

Authorizing the Wind Down of 

Transactions Involving Tabak Invest 

LLC 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this general license, all 

transactions prohibited by the Belarus 

Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 548 

(BSR), that are ordinarily incident and 

necessary to the wind down of any 

transaction involving Tabak Invest LLC 

(‘‘Tabak Invest’’), or any entity in which 

Tabak Invest owns, directly or 

indirectly, a 50 percent or greater 

interest, are authorized through 12:01 

a.m. eastern standard time, February 2, 

2024, provided that any payment to a 

blocked person is made into a blocked 

account at a U.S. financial institution in 

accordance with the BSR. 

(b) This general license does not 

authorize any transactions otherwise 

prohibited by the BSR, including 

transactions involving any person 

blocked pursuant to the BSR other than 

the blocked persons described in 

paragraph (a), unless separately 

authorized. 

Bradley T. Smith, 

Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. 

Dated: December 5, 2023. 

Lisa M. Palluconi, 

Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets 

Control. 

[FR Doc. 2024–26425 Filed 11–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

31 CFR Part 587 

Publication of Russian Harmful 

Foreign Activities Sanctions 

Regulations Web General Licenses 8K, 

25G, 110, 111, and 112 

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets 

Control, Treasury. 

ACTION: Publication of web general 

licenses. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets 

Control (OFAC) is publishing five 

general licenses (GLs) issued pursuant 

to the Russian Harmful Foreign 

Activities Sanctions Regulations: GLs 

8K, 25G, 110, 111, and 112, each of 

which was previously made available 

on OFAC’s website. 

DATES: GLs 8K, 25G, 110, 111, and 112 

were issued on October 30, 2024. See 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional relevant dates. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

OFAC: Assistant Director for Licensing, 

202–622–2480; Assistant Director for 

Regulatory Affairs, 202–622–4855; or 

Assistant Director for Compliance, 202– 

622–2490 or https://ofac.treasury.gov/ 

contact-ofac. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Availability 

This document and additional 

information concerning OFAC are 

available on OFAC’s website: https://

ofac.treasury.gov/. 

Background 

On October 30, 2024, OFAC issued 

GLs 8K, 25G, 110, 111, and 112 to 

authorize certain transactions otherwise 

prohibited by the Russian Harmful 

Foreign Activities Sanctions 

Regulations, 31 CFR part 587. Each GL 

was made available on OFAC’s website 

(https://ofac.treasury.gov) when it was 

issued. GL 8K replaced and superseded 

GL 8J. GL 25G replaced and superseded 

GL 25F. The text of these GL is provided 

below. 

OFFICE OF FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL 

Russian Harmful Foreign Activities 

Sanctions Regulations 

31 CFR Part 587 

GENERAL LICENSE NO. 8K 

Authorizing Transactions Related to Energy 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of 

this general license, all transactions 

prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024 

involving one or more of the following 

entities that are related to energy are 

authorized, through 12:01 a.m. eastern 

daylight time, April 30, 2025: 

(1) State Corporation Bank for 

Development and Foreign Economic Affairs 

Vnesheconombank; 

(2) Public Joint Stock Company Bank 

Financial Corporation Otkritie; 

(3) Sovcombank Open Joint Stock 

Company; 

(4) Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank 

of Russia; 

(5) VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company; 

(6) Joint Stock Company Alfa-Bank; 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1