5010 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2016 / Notices 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CPSC–2010–0038] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Third Party Testing 

of Children’s Products 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (‘‘PRA’’) of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. chapter 35), the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘CPSC’’) announces 

that the Commission has submitted to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) a request for extension of 

approval of a collection of information 

for Third Party Testing of Children’s 

Products, approved previously under 

OMB Control No. 3041–0159. In the 

Federal Register of November 16, 2015 

(80 FR 70762), the CPSC published a 

notice to announce the agency’s 

intention to seek extension of approval 

of the collection of information. The 

Commission received one comment, 

which is addressed in this notice. By 

publication of this notice, the 

Commission announces that CPSC has 

submitted to the OMB a request for 

extension of approval of that collection 

of information, without change. 

DATES: Submit written or electronic 

comments on the collection of 

information by February 29, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments about 

this request by email: OIRA_

submission@omb.eop.gov or fax: 202– 

395–6881. Comments by mail should be 

sent to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk 

Officer for the CPSC, Office of 

Management and Budget, Room 10235, 

725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 

20503. In addition, written comments 

that are sent to OMB also should be 

submitted electronically at: http://

www.regulations.gov, under Docket No. 

CPSC–2010–0038. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert H. Squibb, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 

504–7815, or by email to: rsquibb@

cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comment on the Proposed Extension: 

CPSC received one comment from the 

government of India that raised several 

issues on the proposed extension of 

approval of the collection of information 

related to moving the marking and 

labeling burden requirements for section 

104 rules into the collection of 

information for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products. A summary of the 

issues raised and our responses appear 

below. For the reasons discussed below, 

CPSC has not made any amendments to 

the proposed renewal as a result of the 

comment. 

Issue 1: The commenter stated that 

the ‘‘proposed rule’’ would require 

‘‘manufacturers of children’s products 

. . . to follow all the paperwork 

requirements associated with the 

section 104 rules.’’ The commenter 

objected to the proposed paperwork 

requirements, stating that the 

requirements would ‘‘significantly 

increase the burden on the 

manufacturers and importers of 

children’s products.’’ The commenter 

described the types of increased burden 

anticipated, and asked the CPSC 

‘‘whether there was any injury or risk 

attached or reported from the listed 

products which lead to the proposed 

regulation.’’ 

Response 1: The commenter appears 

to misunderstand the intent of CPSC’s 

Federal Register notice. CPSC did not 

issue a proposed rule that would change 

the paperwork requirements for 

children’s products generally, or for 

rules on durable infant and toddler 

products issued pursuant to section 104 

of the Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) 

(‘‘section 104 rules’’). Rather, CPSC’s 

notice was intended to make 

stakeholders aware that CPSC is seeking 

approval from OMB of a renewal of an 

existing collection of information, 

which is a process required by the PRA. 

For information collection renewals, the 

PRA requires agencies to estimate the 

burden to stakeholders and the burden 

to the U.S. government to meet existing 

paperwork requirements. Addressing 

the renewal of an existing collection of 

information, CPSC’s notice does not 

require any manufacturer or importer to 

increase, alter, amend, or decrease a 

paperwork burden associated with any 

rule issued by the CPSC, including 

section 104 rules. 

CPSC’s Federal Register notice 

fulfilled CPSC’s obligation under the 

PRA to notify the public about the 

estimated burden calculation for the 

information collection for Third Party 

Testing of Children’s Products and to 

seek approval of the renewal from OMB. 

To increase CPSC’s administrative 

efficiency, CPSC proposed to 

consolidate the existing paperwork 

burden estimate for 14 rules that were 

created pursuant to section 104 into one 

OMB control number for Third Party 

Testing of Children’s Products. The 

marking and labeling requirements for 

each of the 14 section 104 rules, set 

forth in Table 1, were established in 

separate prior rulemaking proceedings, 

which were all subject to notice and 

comment rulemaking. Moving the 

estimated burden for meeting marking 

and labeling requirements for these 14 

section 104 rules does not change the 

existing paperwork burden for 

manufacturers and importers. If OMB 

approves the renewal of the collection 

of information for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products, including existing 

paperwork requirements for marking 

and labeling of products subject to a 

section 104 rule, CPSC will account for 

the burden of testing and labeling of 

children’s products under one OMB 

control number, 3041–0159, instead of 

using the 15 separate OMB control 

numbers in use today. To avoid 

confusion, and as shown in Table 1, 

CPSC will discontinue use of the 14 

OMB control numbers currently in use 

for section 104 rules. 

Issue 2: The commenter highlighted 

Article 5.1.2 of the World Trade 

Organization Agreement on Technical 

Barriers to Trade regarding unnecessary 

obstacles to international trade. Article 

5.1.2 states: 

conformity assessment procedures are not 

prepared, adopted or applied with a view to 

or with the effect of creating unnecessary 

obstacles to international trade. This means, 

inter alia, that conformity assessment 

procedures shall not be more strict or be 

applied more strictly than is necessary to 

give the importing Member adequate 

confidence that products conform with the 

applicable technical regulations or standards, 

taking account of the risks non-conformity 

would create. 

Response 2: After reviewing Article 

5.1.2, CPSC does not believe that the 

Article is applicable to the CPSC’s 

proposed renewal of the collection of 

information for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products or the proposed 

reallocation of the paperwork burden for 

section 104 rules. CPSC’s notice does 

not alter or amend any existing 

technical regulation or paperwork 

requirement for children’s products. 

Rather, for administrative purposes, 

CPSC is consolidating existing 

collections of information. 

Issue 3: The commenter stated that 

the ‘‘quality, utility and clarity’’ of the 

products could be derived from general 

marking procedures provided for ‘‘in the 

infant products,’’ and the commenter 

asked about the necessity of adding 

marking and labeling requirements for 

section 104 rules, and also inquired 

about how the proposed requirement 

would be implemented. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2016 / Notices 5011 

Response 3: CPSC will not implement 

changes to marking and labeling 

requirements faced by industry because 

CPSC is not changing or adding any 

marking or labeling requirements for 

children’s products or for section 104 

rules. The marking and labeling 

requirements for each of the 14 section 

104 rules were established in separate 

prior rulemaking proceedings, which 

were all subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking. 

Issue 4: The commenter stated that 

implementation of the proposed 

requirement ‘‘may lead to unnecessary 

delay and escalate the cost’’ for export 

of children’s products to the United 

States. The commenter stated that 

because the ‘‘proposed regulation’’ 

could create ‘‘a huge cost for Indian 

exports of children’s products, India 

may like to seek bilateral consultation 

with USA to sort out the issue.’’ 

Response 4: Discontinuing use of 14 

existing OMB control numbers for 

section 104 rules and moving the 

burden allocation into one OMB control 

number for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products will not create any 

new requirements for manufacturers or 

importers, and therefore, will not cause 

delay or increased costs. Going forward, 

CPSC’s use of a single OMB control 

number should reduce burden and costs 

for CPSC to meet PRA renewal 

requirements, which must be updated 

every 3 years. 

Description of the Collection: CPSC 

has submitted the following currently 

approved collection of information to 

OMB for extension: 

Title: Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products 

OMB Number: 3041–0159 

Type of Review: Renewal of collection 

for third party testing of children’s 

products and inclusion of the 

previously approved burden for marking 

and labeling of durable infant and 

toddler products into this collection of 

information. 

General Description of Collection 

Testing and Certification: On 

November 8, 2011, the Commission 

issued two rules for implementing third 

party testing and certification of 

children’s products, as required by 

section 14 of the Consumer Product 

Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’): 

• Testing and Labeling Pertaining to 

Product Certification (76 FR 69482, 

codified at 16 CFR part 1107; ‘‘the 

testing rule’’); and 

• Conditions and Requirements for 

Relying on Component Part Testing or 

Certification, or Another Party’s 

Finished Product Testing or 

Certification to Meet Testing and 

Certification Requirements (76 FR 

69547, codified at 16 CFR part 1109; 

‘‘the component part rule’’). 

The testing rule establishes 

requirements for manufacturers to 

conduct initial third party testing and 

certification of children’s products, 

testing when there has been a material 

change in the product, continuing 

testing (periodic testing), and guarding 

against undue influence. A final rule on 

Representative Samples for Periodic 

Testing of Children’s Products (77 FR 

72205, Dec. 5, 2012) amended the 

testing rule to require that 

representative samples be selected for 

periodic testing of children’s products. 

The component part rule is a 

companion to the testing rule that is 

intended to reduce third party testing 

burdens by providing all parties 

involved in the required testing and 

certifying of children’s products the 

flexibility to conduct or rely upon 

testing where it is the easiest and least 

expensive. Certification of a children’s 

product can be based upon one or more 

of the following: (a) Component part 

testing; (b) component part certification; 

(c) another party’s finished product 

testing; or (d) another party’s finished 

product certification. 

Records required by the testing rule 

and the rule on selecting representative 

samples appear in 16 CFR 1107.26. 

Required records include a certificate, 

and records documenting third party 

testing and related sampling plans. 

These requirements largely overlap the 

recordkeeping requirements in the 

component part rule, codified at 16 CFR 

1109.5(g). Duplicate recordkeeping is 

not required; records need to be created 

and maintained only once to meet the 

applicable recordkeeping requirements. 

The component part rule also requires 

records that enable tracing a product or 

component back to the entity that had 

a product tested for compliance, and 

also requires attestations of due care to 

ensure test result integrity. 

Section 104 Rules: The Commission 

has issued 14 section 104 rules. Section 

104 rules issued to date appear in Table 

1. Each section 104 rule contains 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature: 

• Each product and the shipping 

container must have a permanent label 

or marking that identifies the name and 

address (city, state, and zip code) of the 

manufacturer, distributor, or seller. 

• A permanent code mark or other 

product identification shall be provided 

on the infant carrier and its package or 

shipping container, if multiple 

packaging is used. The code will 

identify the date (month and year) of 

manufacture and permit future 

identification of any given model. 

Each standard also requires products 

to include easy-to-read and understand 

instructions regarding assembly, 

maintenance, cleaning, use, and 

adjustments, where applicable. 

OMB has assigned control numbers 

for the estimated burden to comply with 

marking and labeling requirements in 

each section 104 rule. With this 

renewal, CPSC is moving the marking 

and labeling burden requirements for 

section 104 rules into the collection of 

information for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products. The paperwork 

burdens associated with the section 104 

rules are appropriately included in the 

collection for Third Party Testing of 

Children’s Products because all of the 

section 104 products are also required to 

be third party tested. Having all of the 

burden hours under one collection for 

children’s products provides one OMB 

control number and eases the 

administrative burden of renewing 

multiple collections. CPSC will 

discontinue using the OMB control 

numbers currently assigned to 

individual section 104 rules. The 

discontinued OMB control numbers are 

listed in Table 1. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion. 

Affected Public: Manufacturers and 

importers of children’s products subject 

to a children’s product safety rule. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

Testing and Certification: CPSC 

reviewed every category in the NAICS 

and selected categories that included 

firms that could manufacture or sell any 

consumer product that could be covered 

by a consumer product safety rule. 

Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 

we determined that there were 

approximately 34,000 manufacturers, 

about 77,000 wholesalers, and about 

133,000 retailers in these categories. 

However, these categories also include 

many non-children’s products, which 

are not covered by any children’s 

product safety rules. Therefore, these 

numbers would constitute an 

overestimate of the number of firms that 

are subject to the recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Section 104 Rules: Table 1 

summarizes the durable infant and 

toddler products subject to the marking 

and labeling requirements being moved 

into OMB control number 3041–0159. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
5012 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2016 / Notices 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED BURDEN FOR MARKING AND LABELING IN SECTION 104 RULES

Discontinued OMB 

Control No. 16 CFR Part Description Mfrs. Models 

Total 

respondent 

hours 

3041–0145 ..................... 1215 Safety Standard for Infant Bath Seats ................ 7 2 14 

3041–0141 ..................... 1216 Safety Standard for Infant Walkers ..................... 16 4 64 

3041–0150 ..................... 1217 Safety Standard for Toddler Beds ....................... 78 10 780 

3041–0157 ..................... 1218 Safety Standard for Bassinets and Cradles ........ 62 5 310 

3041–0147 ..................... 1219 Safety Standard for Full-Size Cribs ..................... 78 11 858 

3041–0147 ..................... 1220 Safety Standard for Non-Full-Size Cribs ............. 24 4 96 

3041–0152 ..................... 1221 Safety Standard for Play Yards ........................... 31 4 124 

3041–0160 ..................... 1222 Safety Standard for Infant Bedside Sleepers ...... 5 2 10 

3041–0155 ..................... 1223 Safety Standard for Swings ................................. 10 11 110 

3041–0149 ..................... 1224 Safety Standard for Portable Bedrails ................. 17 2 34 

3041–0158 ..................... 1225 Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers ... 71 2 142 

3041–0162 ..................... 1226 Safety Standard for Soft Infant and Toddler Carriers.54 2 108 

3041–0164 ..................... 1227 Safety Standard for Carriages and Strollers ....... 85 8 680 

3041–0166 ..................... 1230 Safety Standard for Frame Child Carriers (not 

effective until 9/2016).

16 3 48 

Total burden hours ........................ .............................................................................. ........................ ........................ 3,378 

Estimated Time per Response: 

Testing and Certification: Based on 

comments received during rulemaking 

for the testing rule, we estimate 

recordkeeping for approximately 

300,000 non-apparel children’s products 

per year, with an average of 5 hours of 

recordkeeping burden associated with 

each product. We also estimate 

recordkeeping for approximately 1.3 

million children’s apparel and footwear 

products per year, with an average of 3 

hours of recordkeeping burden 

associated with each product. 

Manufacturers that are required to 

conduct periodic testing have an 

additional recordkeeping burden 

estimated at 4 hours per representative 

sampling plan. 

Section 104 Rules: Each section 104 

rule contains a similar analysis for 

marking and labeling that estimates the 

time to make any necessary changes to 

marking and labeling requirements at 

one hour per model. 

Total Estimated Annual Burden: 

Testing and Certification: The total 

estimated annual burden for 

recordkeeping associated with the 

testing rule is 5.4 million hours (300,000 

non-apparel children’s products × 5 

hours per non-apparel children’s 

product + 1,300,000 children’s apparel 

products × 3 hours per children’s 

apparel product = 1.5 million hours + 

3.9 million hours, or a total of 5.4 

million hours). 

Representative Sampling Plans for 

Periodic Testing: We estimate that if 

each product line averages 50 

individual models or styles, then a total 

of 32,000 individual representative 

sampling plans (1.6 million children’s 

products ÷ 50 models or styles) would 

need to be developed and documented. 

This would require 128,000 hours 

(32,000 plans × 4 hours per plan). If 

each product line averages 10 

individual models or styles, then a total 

of 160,000 different representative 

sampling plans (1.6 million children’s 

products ÷ 10 models or styles) would 

need to be documented. This would 

require 640,000 hours (160,000 plans × 

4 hours per plan). Accordingly, the 

requirement to document the basis for 

selecting representative samples could 

increase the estimated annual burden by 

up to 640,000 hours. 

Component Part Testing: The 

component part rule shifts some testing 

costs and some recordkeeping costs to 

component part and finished product 

suppliers because some testing will be 

performed by these parties rather than 

by the finished product certifiers 

(manufacturers and importers). Even if a 

finished product certifier can rely 

entirely on component part and finished 

product suppliers for all required 

testing, however, the finished product 

supplier will still have some 

recordkeeping burden to create and 

maintain a finished product certificate. 

Therefore, although the component part 

testing rule may reduce the total cost of 

the testing required by the testing and 

certification rule, the rule increases the 

estimated annual recordkeeping burden 

for those who choose to use component 

part testing. 

Because we do not know how many 

companies participate in component 

part testing and supply test reports or 

certifications to other certifiers in the 

supply chain, we have no concrete data 

to estimate the recordkeeping and third 

party disclosure requirements in the 

component part rule. Likewise, no clear 

method exists for estimating the number 

of finished product certifiers who 

conduct their own component part 

testing. In the component part 

rulemaking, we suggested that the 

recordkeeping burden for the 

component part testing rule could 

amount to 10 percent of the burden 

estimated for the testing and labeling 

rule. 76 FR 69546, 69579 (Nov. 8, 2011). 

Currently, we have no basis to change 

this estimate. 

In addition to recordkeeping, the 

component part rule requires third party 

disclosure of test reports and 

certificates, if any, to a certifier who 

intends to rely on such documents to 

issue its own certificate. Without data, 

allocation of burden estimation between 

the recordkeeping and third party 

disclosure requirements is difficult. 

However, based on our previous 

analysis, we continue to estimate that 

creating and maintaining records 

accounts for approximately 90 percent 

of the burden, while the third party 

disclosure burden is much less, perhaps 

approximately 10 percent. Therefore, if 

we continue to use the estimate that 

component part testing will amount to 

about 10 percent of the burden 

estimated for the testing rule, then the 

hour burden of the component part rule 

is estimated to be about 540,000 hours 

total annually (10% of 5.4 million 

hours); allocating 486,000 hours for 

recordkeeping and 54,000 hours for 

third party disclosure. 

Section 104 Rules: The burden for 

marking and labeling for each section 

104 rule is provided in Table 1. The 

estimated total number of respondent 

hours is 3,378. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2016 / Notices 5013 

Dated: January 26, 2016. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2016–01699 Filed 1–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID DOD–2012–HA–0160] 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Health Affairs announces a 

proposed public information collection 

and seeks public comment on the 

provisions thereof. Comments are 

invited on: (a) Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the information collection on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Consideration will be given to all 

comments received by March 29, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Department of Defense, Office 

of the Deputy Chief Management 

Officer, Directorate of Oversight and 

Compliance, Regulatory and Audit 

Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–9010. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name, docket 

number and title for this Federal 

Register document. The general policy 

for comments and other submissions 

from members of the public is to make 

these submissions available for public 

viewing on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

Any associated form(s) for this 

collection may be located within this 

same electronic docket and downloaded 

for review/testing. Follow the 

instructions at http://

www.regulations.gov for submitting 

comments. Please submit comments on 

any given form identified by docket 

number, form number, and title. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on this 

proposed information collection or to 

obtain a copy of the proposal and 

associated collection instruments, 

please write to the Defense Health 

Agency Uniform Business Office, 

Defense Health Headquarters, 7700 

Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, Virginia 

22042, ATTN: DeLisa E. Prater, Program 

Manager, 703–681–3492. ext. 6757 (DSN 

761). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title; Associated Form; and OMB 

Number: Third Party Collection 

Program/Medical Services Account/

Other Health Insurance; DD Form 2569; 

OMB Control Number 0720–0055. 

Needs and Uses: The information 

collection requirement is necessary to 

obtain health insurance policy 

information used for coordination of 

health care benefits and billing third 

party payers and other federal agencies 

for health care provided to their 

beneficiaries and also to civilian nonUniformed Service beneficiaries for 

health care provided to them. DoD 

implemented the Third Party Collection 

Program (TPCP) in FY87 based on the 

authority granted in 10 U.S.C. 1095 and 

implemented by 32 CFR 220 in 

accordance with the Consolidated 

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 

1986 (COBRA) (Pub. L. 99–272, section 

2001, April 7, 1986). Under the TPCP, 

DoD is authorized to collect from thirdparty payers the cost of inpatient and 

outpatient services rendered to DoD 

beneficiaries who have other health 

insurance. Military treatment facilities 

(MTFs) are required to make this form 

available to third-party payers upon 

request. A third-party payer may not 

request any other assignment of benefits 

form from the subscriber. Also, for 

civilian non-Uniformed Services 

beneficiary and interagency patients, DD 

Form 2569 is necessary and serves as an 

assignment of benefits, approval to 

submit claims to payers on behalf of the 

patient and authorization to release 

medical information. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households. 

Annual Burden Hours: 260,000. 

Number of Respondents: 3,900,000. 

Responses per Respondent: 1. 

Annual Responses: 3,900,000. 

Average Burden per Response: 4 

minutes. 

Frequency: Annually, on occasion. 

The administration has placed an 

increased emphasis upon recovery of 

health care expenses under the TPCP, as 

authorized by 10 U.S.C. 1095 and 

1097b, and also from civilians and other 

federal agencies as authorized by 10 

U.S.C. 1079b and 1085. Completion of 

this form, while increasing total burden 

hours, will aid in increasing revenue to 

improve services, operating efficiency 

and effectiveness within the Military 

Health System. Funds collected return 

directly to the operation and 

maintenance budget of the MTF where 

the care was delivered and are used to 

improve the quality of healthcare. Often 

the funds allow the continuation of 

programs or purchasing of equipment at 

the facilities for which there would 

otherwise not be funding. This 

information is collected either during 

the admission and/or discharge process 

for an inpatient stay or during the 

registration process for an outpatient 

visit or as soon as practical thereafter. 

Dated: January 26, 2016. 

Morgan E. Park, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2016–01702 Filed 1–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–9025–3] 

Environmental Impact Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa. 

Weekly receipt of Environmental 

Impact Statements (EISs), Filed 01/18/

2016 Through 01/22/2016, Pursuant to 

40 CFR 1506.9. 

Notice 

Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act 

requires that EPA make public its 

comments on EISs issued by other 

Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters 

on EISs are available at: https://

cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-nepa-public/

action/eis/search. 

EIS No. 20160016, Final, FHWA, TX, 

SH 249 Extension, Contact: Carlos 

Swonke 512–416–2734, Under MAP– 

21 Section 1319 FHWA has issued a 

single FEIS and ROD. Therefore, the 

30-day wait/review period under 

NEPA does not apply to this action. 

EIS No. 20160017, Draft, USFS, AK, 

Shoreline II Oufitter/Guide (formerly 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES