41262 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Notices 

Board seeks public comment on the 

following questions: 

1. Would the proposed rates be useful 

to market participants, researchers, or 

others? For what purpose(s)? 

2. Are one or more of the proposed 

rates more likely to be useful than the 

other(s)? For what purpose(s)? 

3. Are there changes to one or more 

of the rates that would make them more 

useful? For what purpose(s)? 

4. Are there particular sources of data 

or data sets that should be incorporated 

in the calculation of the rates that would 

make the rates more useful to the 

public? 

5. Are there changes that should be 

made to the proposed manner of 

calculating and publishing the three 

rates? 

6. Is the proposed time of publication 

early enough to facilitate the use of the 

rates for various purposes? 

7. Is the use of the volume-weighted 

median appropriate? Is there a different 

measure of the central tendency of the 

distribution of individual transacted 

rates that would be better suited? For 

what purpose(s)? 

8. Are the proposed summary 

statistics useful to the market? For what 

purposes? Would other summary 

statistics be more useful to accompany 

the daily publication, instead of or in 

addition to those proposed? 

Administrative Law 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 

5 CFR part 1320, Appendix A.1), the 

Board reviewed the proposal under the 

authority delegated to the Board by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

purposes of calculating burden under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, a 

‘‘collection of information’’ involves 10 

or more respondents. As noted above, 

the data to be used to produce the 

proposed rates will be obtained solely 

from (1) BNYM with respect to tri-party 

GC repo data and (2) DTCC Solutions 

with respect to GCF repo data and DVP 

bilateral repo data. Therefore, no 

collection of information pursuant to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act is 

contemplated by the proposed rate 

production at this time. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (‘‘RFA’’) generally 

requires an agency to perform an initial 

and a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

on the impact a rule is expected to have 

on small entities. The RFA imposes 

these requirements in situations where 

an agency is required by law to publish 

a general notice of proposed rulemaking 

for any proposed rule. The production 

of the rates does not create any 

obligations or rights for any private 

parties, including any small entities, 

and so the publication of a general 

notice of proposed rulemaking is not 

required. Accordingly, the RFA does not 

apply and an initial and final regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, August 22, 2017. 

Ann E. Misback, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18402 Filed 8–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

GULF COAST ECOSYSTEM 

RESTORATION COUNCIL 

[Docket No.: 108292017–1111–16] 

Proposed Amendment to Initial (2015) 

Funded Priorities List 

AGENCY: Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council. 

ACTION: Proposed amendment to Initial 

Funded Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: The Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council (Council) seeks 

public and Tribal comment on a 

proposal to amend its Initial Funded 

Priorities List (FPL) to approve 

implementation funding for the 

Robinson Preserve Wetlands Restoration 

project (Robinson Preserve), Florida. 

The Council is proposing to approve 

$1,319,636 in implementation funding 

for Robinson Preserve. The Council is 

also proposing to reallocate $470,910 

from planning to implementation. The 

total amount of funding available for 

implementation of Robinson Preserve 

would be $1,790,546. These funds 

would be used to restore 118.2 acres of 

coastal habitat, along with related 

activities in Tampa Bay. The 

Department of Commerce’s National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) is the sponsor 

of the Robinson Preserve project. 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

other applicable laws, the Council is 

proposing to adopt an existing 2015 

Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement (PEIS) http://www.

habitat.noaa.gov/pdf/NOAA_

Restoration_Center_Final_PEIS.pdf 

developed by NOAA’s Restoration 

Center and ensure compliance with the 

terms and conditions of a Clean Water 

Act (CWA) Section 404 permit that has 

been issued for the Robinson Preserve 

project. In so doing, the Council would 

expedite project implementation, reduce 

planning costs and potentially increase 

the ecological benefits of this project. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

amendment are due September 29, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed 

amendment may be submitted as 

follows: 

By Email: Submit comments by email 

to frcomments@restorethegulf.gov. 

Email submission of comments ensures 

timely receipt and enables the Council 

to make them available to the public. In 

general, the Council will make such 

comments available for public 

inspection and copying on its Web site, 

www.restorethegulf.gov, without change, 

including any business or personal 

information provided, such as names, 

addresses, email addresses and 

telephone numbers. All comments 

received, including attachments and 

other supporting materials, will be part 

of the public record and subject to 

public disclosure. You should only 

submit information that you wish to 

make publicly available. 

By Mail: Send comments to Gulf Coast 

Ecosystem Restoration Council, 500 

Poydras Street, Suite 1117, New 

Orleans, LA 70130. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Please send questions by email to 

frcomments@restorethegulf.gov or 

contact John Ettinger at (504) 444–3522. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill led to 

passage of the Resources and 

Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist 

Opportunities, and Revived Economies 

of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012 

(RESTORE Act) (33 U.S.C. 1321(t) and 

note), which dedicates 80 percent of all 

Clean Water Act administrative and 

civil penalties related to the oil spill to 

the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund 

(Trust Fund). The RESTORE Act also 

created the Council, an independent 

Federal entity comprised of the five Gulf 

Coast states and six Federal agencies. 

Among other responsibilities, the 

Council administers a portion of the 

Trust Fund known as the CouncilSelected Restoration Component in 

order to ‘‘undertake projects and 

programs, using the best available 

science, that would restore and protect 

the natural resources, ecosystems, 

fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, 

beaches, coastal wetlands, and economy 

of the Gulf Coast.’’ Additional 

information on the Council can be 

found here: https://

www.restorethegulf.gov. 

On December 9, 2015, the Council 

approved the FPL, which includes 

projects and programs approved for 

funding under the Council-Selected 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Notices 41263 

Restoration Component, along with 

other activities the Council identified as 

priorities for potential future funding. 

Activities approved for funding in the 

FPL are included in ‘‘Category 1;’’ the 

priorities for potential future funding 

are in ‘‘Category 2.’’ In the FPL the 

Council approved approximately $156.6 

million in Category 1 restoration and 

planning activities, and prioritized 

twelve Category 2 activities for possible 

funding in the future, subject to 

environmental compliance and further 

Council and public review. The Council 

included planning activities for 

Robinson Preserve in Category 1 and 

implementation activities for Robinson 

Preserve in Category 2. 

The Council reserved approximately 

$26.6 million for implementing priority 

activities in the future. These reserved 

funds may be used to support some, all 

or none of the activities included in 

Category 2 of the FPL and/or to support 

other activities not currently under 

consideration by the Council. As 

appropriate, the Council intends to 

review each activity in Category 2 in 

order to determine whether to: (1) Move 

the activity to Category 1 and approve 

it for funding, (2) remove it from 

Category 2 and any further 

consideration, or (3) continue to include 

it in Category 2. A Council decision to 

amend the FPL to move an activity from 

Category 2 into Category 1 must be 

approved by a Council vote after 

consideration of public and Tribal 

comments. 

II. Environmental Compliance 

Prior to approving an activity for 

funding in FPL Category 1, the Council 

must comply with NEPA and other 

applicable Federal environmental laws. 

At the time of approval of the FPL, the 

Council had not addressed NEPA and 

other laws applicable to implementation 

of Robinson Preserve. The Council did, 

however, recognize the potential 

ecological value of Robinson Preserve, 

based on the review conducted during 

the FPL process. For this reason, the 

Council approved $470,910 in planning 

funds for Robinson Preserve, a portion 

of which would be used to complete any 

needed environmental compliance 

activities. As noted above, the Council 

placed the implementation portion of 

Robinson Preserve into FPL Category 2, 

pending the outcome of this 

environmental compliance work and 

further Council review. The estimated 

cost of implementation of Robinson 

Preserve was $1,319,636. 

To comply with NEPA for Robinson 

Preserve, the Council is proposing to 

adopt the 2015 PEIS developed by 

NOAA’s Restoration Center. This PEIS 

addresses a range of restoration types 

including those in the Robinson 

Preserve implementation funding 

proposal. NOAA has determined that 

the specific implementation activities 

for which funding is being sought are 

fully covered by this PEIS, and therefore 

no further NEPA review would be 

needed. 

On May 22, 2017, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers issued a Clean Water 

Act (CWA) Section 404 permit for the 

Robinson Preserve project. NOAA has 

confirmed that this permit addresses its 

Magnuson-Stevens Act 

recommendations pertaining to 

Essential Fish Habitat. The permit also 

contains conditions pertaining to 

compliance with the Endangered 

Species Act and the National Historic 

Preservation Act. In addition, the 

Florida State Historic Preservation 

Officer and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service have reviewed the overall 

Robinson Preserve project. These 

reviews were conducted as part of their 

respective reviews of a smaller 

Robinson Preserve restoration project 

which is sponsored by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and is being funded separately under 

the Council-Selected Restoration 

Component. 

The Council has reviewed the 

aforementioned environmental 

compliance documentation. Based on 

this review, the Council is proposing to 

adopt the PEIS to support the approval 

of implementation funds for Robinson 

Preserve, provided that the project is 

implemented in accordance with the 

terms and conditions of the CWA 

Section 404 permit. This permit and the 

associated documentation can be found 

here: https://www.restorethegulf.gov/ 

funded-priorities-list. (See: Robinson 

Preserve Wetlands Restoration— 

Implementation.) 

Robinson Preserve Project 

If approved by the Council, the funds 

to implement Robinson Preserve would 

be used to create habitat and natural 

flow regimes through hydrologic 

connections, as well as complete exotic 

and invasive vegetation removal, native 

planting, monitoring, community 

outreach, restoration practitioner 

education, and an inventory of potential 

Tampa Bay watershed hydrologic 

restoration projects. 

The Initial FPL describes Robinson 

Preserve as a project to restore 140-acres 

of upland and wetland habitat (85 acres 

of upland habitat and 55 acres of created 

wetland and sub-tidal habitats). The 

actual acreage to be restored under this 

proposed FPL amendment would be 

118.2 acres (57.6 acres of coastal upland 

habitat and 60.6 acres of wetland, open 

water sub-tidal, and open freshwater 

habitats). This acreage adjustment is the 

result of refinements in project design 

(in response to public input) and 

subtraction of acreage being restored 

through the complementary EPA 

restoration effort referenced above. The 

project design was reduced by 7 acres to 

balance public access interests, input 

from nearby residents and habitat 

suitability. The remainder of the acreage 

adjustment for this Robinson Preserve 

funding request is 14.8 acres, which is 

the amount of adjoining acreage that 

will be restored by the EPA. 

While the acreage footprint of 

NOAA’s Robinson Preserve project has 

decreased, the complexity and per unit 

cost of the project have increased. To 

maintain the long-term viability of the 

restoration design and protect existing 

habitats, the scope of the hydrologic 

restoration expanded to include more 

complex connections. The expanded 

scope also provides added benefits 

outside of the restoration footprint by 

integrating and hydrologically 

interconnecting the entire 632-acre 

preserve. NOAA has indicated that 

these changes, make up more than one 

third of the restoration implementation 

budget, increasing the wetland and subtidal creation cost per acre for the 

project. The total of $1,790,546 will be 

needed to implement this project. 

Additional information on Robinson 

Preserve, including metrics of success, 

response to science reviews and more is 

available in an activity-specific 

appendix to the FPL, which can be 

found at https://www.restorethegulf.gov. 

Please see the table on page 25 of the 

FPL and click on: Robinson Preserve 

Wetlands Restoration (Implementation). 

Will D. Spoon, 

Program Analyst, Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18334 Filed 8–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Toxic Substances and 

Disease Registry 

[60Day–17–0051; Docket No. ATSDR–2017– 

0004] 

Proposed Data Collection Submitted 

for Public Comment and 

Recommendations 

AGENCY: Agency for Toxic Substances 

and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES