The U.S. Codex Office
Economic Analysis Bureau
Industry and Security Bureau
International Trade Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Army Department
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Children and Families Administration
Health Resources and Services Administration
National Institutes of Health
Coast Guard
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Land Management Bureau
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau
Drug Enforcement Administration
Institute of Museum and Library Services
Federal Aviation Administration
Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Comptroller of the Currency
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
Notification of implementation.
The Secretary of State, acting under authority delegated pursuant to Executive Order 12851, has determined pursuant to the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals. The sanctions imposed on Russia in connection with this determination include a prohibition, subject to partial waiver, on the export to Russia of national security-controlled goods and technology subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Pursuant to the EAR, BIS already maintains controls on exports and reexports to Russia of national security-controlled “items” (commodities, software and technology) that are subject to the EAR. This document informs the public that, consistent with BIS's implementation of the CBW Act sanctions, certain license exceptions will be suspended for use with national security-controlled items destined for Russia, and most license applications for exports or reexports of national security-controlled items destined for Russia will be reviewed under a presumption of denial.
March 18, 2021.
Alexander Lopes, Office of Nonproliferation and Treaty Compliance, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce. Phone: (202) 482-3825; Email:
The Secretary of State, acting under authority delegated pursuant to Executive Order 12851, has determined pursuant to Section 306(a) of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical weapons against its own nationals. The sanctions imposed on Russia in connection with this determination include a prohibition on the export to Russia of national security-controlled goods and technology subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). The Secretary of State also issued a partial waiver under the CBW Act of these sanctions on national security grounds. Pursuant to Section 742.4 of the EAR, BIS already maintains controls on exports and reexports to Russia of national security-controlled “items” (commodities, software and technology) that are subject to the EAR. Consistent with BIS's implementation of the CBW Act sanctions, license applications for exports or reexports of national security-controlled items to Russia will be reviewed under a presumption of denial. However, certain categories of exports and reexports will be permitted under a partial waiver of the application of the sanctions, including exports and reexports made under certain License Exceptions. A License Exception is an authorization allowing exports, reexports, or transfers (in-country) under stated conditions of items subject to the EAR that would otherwise require a license. Notably, as described in more detail below, one of the waiver provisions for commercial space launch activities will expire on September 1, 2021, after which time the prohibition will apply to the review of such license applications.
While the focus of this document is on BIS's implementing actions, exporters of items subject to the EAR should also be aware that in order to take additional steps to address Russia's use of chemical weapons, the Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) § 126.1(d)(2) to include Russia in the list of countries subject to a policy of denial for exports of defense articles and defense services. Consistent with Note 1 to Country Group D:5 in Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR, countries included in § 126.1 of the ITAR are also considered to be in Country Group D:5. Placement of a country in Country Group D:5 generally limits the availability of license exceptions for exports and reexports of certain items. See, generally, 15 CFR part 740.
Except as described below (under “National Security Waiver”), effective March 18, 2021, license applications for exports or reexports of national security-controlled items to Russia will be reviewed under a presumption of denial. In particular, this policy applies to commercial end-users and civil end-uses in Russia and to state-owned enterprises and state-funded enterprises in Russia.
Further, in accordance with the implementation of these new sanctions under the CBW Act, and consistent with Section 740.2(b) of the EAR, which provides that all License Exceptions are subject to revision, suspension, or revocation, in whole or in part, without notice, BIS hereby suspends License Exception RPL (Service and Replacement of Parts and Equipment), License Exception TSU (Technology and Software Unrestricted), and License Exception APR (Additional Permissive Reexports) for use with items controlled for national security reasons that are destined to Russia.
The Secretary of State has determined and certified to Congress pursuant to Section 307(d) of the CBW Act that it is essential to the national security interest of the United States to partially waive the application of the statute with respect to sanctions on the licensing of certain exports and reexports as
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
Final rule and interim final rule; correction.
This document corrects technical errors in the final rule that appeared in the December 28, 2020,
This correction is effective March 18, 2021, and is applicable beginning January 1, 2021.
Terri Plumb, (410) 786-4481, Gaysha Brooks, (410) 786-9649, or Annette Brewer (410) 786-6580.
In FR Doc. 2020-26815 of December 28, 2020, the CY 2021 PFS final rule (85 FR 84472), there were technical errors that are identified and corrected in this correcting document. These corrections are effective and applicable beginning January 1, 2021.
On page 84503, in the Medicare telehealth services list, due to a typographical error, the CPT code is incorrect.
On page 84513 in Table 14: Final Services for Temporary Addition to the Medicare Telehealth Services List, we inadvertently included CPT code 96121.
On page 84516 in Table 14: Final Services for Temporary Addition to the Medicare Telehealth Services List, we inadvertently included CPT codes 99221, 99222, and 99223.
On page 84560 in Table 23: CY 2020 Work RVUs and CY 2021 Final Work RVUs, we inadvertently included CPT codes 99492 and 99493 and inadvertently omitted HCPCS codes G2211 and G2212. There were no changes made to the work RVUs for CPT codes 99492 and 99493 in this final rule.
On page 84562 in Table 24: Comparison of Physician Time, and Clinical Staff Time (Non-facility and Facility) for HCPCS Codes, CY 2020 Values vs. 2021 Final Values, we inadvertently included CPT codes 99492 and 99493 and inadvertently omitted HCPCS Codes G2211 and G2212.
On page 84665 in Table 28: CY 2021 Work RVUs for New, Revised and Potentially Misvalued Codes, due to a typographical error, we inadvertently included the incorrect descriptor for HCPCS code G2216.
Due to a technical change that was applied in error to the indirect practice expense (PE) allocation for HCPCS codes G2082 and G2083 in the final rule, the Addendum B posted on the CMS website contained errors for the Non-Facility PE RVUs, Facility PE RVUs, Total Non-Facility RVUs, and the Total Facility RVUs. Specifically, we assigned an incorrect physician specialty in our ratesetting process to the predecessor codes for HCPCS codes G2082 and G2083 in the CY 2020 PFS final rule and CY 2021 PFS proposed rule. We intended to correct the assigned physician specialty for these codes in the CY 2021 PFS final rule; however, we neglected to discuss this correction in the course of PFS rulemaking for CY 2021. Since this technical change was applied in the CY 2021 PFS final rule, but was not discussed in the course of PFS rulemaking for CY 2021, we are removing this change for the 2021 calendar year, retroactive to January 1, 2021. The Non-Facility PE RVUs, Facility PE RVUs, Total Non-Facility RVUs, and Total Facility RVUs that resulted from the correction of this error are reflected in the revised CY 2021 Addendum B available on the CMS website at
1. In Addendum B—Relative Value Units and Related Information Used in the CY 2021 PFS final rule, line 12615 for CPT/HCPCS code G2082, Visit esketamine 56m or less,
a. Seventh column, the Non-Facility PE RVUs the value “17.68” is corrected to read “24.06”.
b. Eighth column, the Facility PE RVUs the value ” 0.17” is corrected to read “0.27”.
c. Tenth column, Total Non-Facility RVUs the value “18.43” is corrected to read “24.81”.
d. Eleventh column, Total Facility RVUs the value “0.92” is corrected to read “1.02”.
2. In Addendum B—Relative Value Units and Related Information Used in the CY 2021 PFS final rule, line 12616 for CPT/HCPCS G2083 for Visit esketamine, >56m,
a. Seventh column the Non-Facility PE RVUs the value “25.54” is corrected to read “34.72”.
b. Eighth column the Facility PE RVUs the value “0.17” is corrected to read “0.27”.
c. Tenth column, Total Non-Facility RVUs the value “26.29” is corrected to read “35.47”.
d. Eleventh column Total Facility RVUs the value “0.92” is corrected to read “1.02”.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (the APA), the agency is required to publish a notice of the proposed rule in the
In our view, this correcting document does not constitute a rulemaking that would be subject to these requirements. This document merely corrects technical errors in the CY 2021 PFS final rule. The corrections contained in this document are consistent with, and
In FR Doc. 2020-26815 (85 FR 84472), published December 28, 2020, make the following corrections:
1. On page 84503, second column, third bullet, third line, the number “994780” is corrected to read “99478”.
2. On page 84513 in Table 14: Final Services for Temporary Addition to the Medicare Telehealth Services List, the second column, the third row, is corrected by removing the listing for HCPCS code 96121 in the second and third columns.
3. On page 84516 in Table 14: Final Services for Temporary Addition to the Medicare Telehealth Services List, the second column, the second, third, and fourth rows are corrected by removing the listings for HCPCS codes 99221, 99222, and 99223 in the second and third columns.
4. On page 84560, Table 23: CY 2020 Work RVUs and CY 2021 Final Work RVUs, is corrected by removing CPT codes 99492 and 99493 and adding rows for HCPCS codes G2211 and G2212 to read as follows:
5. On page 84562, Table 24: Comparison of Physician Time, and Clinical Staff Time (Non-facility and Facility) for HCPCS Codes, CY 2020 Values vs. 2021 Final Values, is corrected by removing CPT codes 99492 and 99493 and adding rows for HCPCS codes G2211 and G2212 to read as follows:
6. On page 84665 in Table 28: CY 2021 Work RVUs for New, Revised and Potentially Misvalued Codes, the second column, the third row, the phrase “Take-home supply of auto-injector naloxone” is corrected to read “Take-home supply of injectable naloxone”.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Correcting amendment.
This action corrects the regulations governing the West Coast Sablefish Primary fishery after the expiration of the emergency rule to temporarily extend the 2020 season for the Sablefish Primary fishery. The amendatory instructions for the temporary rule were written incorrectly so that when the temporary rule expired, important regulations were removed and reserved rather than reinstated correctly. These corrections are necessary so the regulations accurately implement the Pacific Fishery Management Council's intent.
This correction is effective March 18, 2021.
Colin Sayre, phone: (206) 526 4656 or email:
NMFS published a temporary emergency rule on October 27, 2020 (85 FR 68001), that extended the season length for the West Coast Sablefish Primary fishery. The temporary rule extended the season close date from October 31 to December 31 for the 2020 fishing year, based on a recommendation from the Pacific Fishery Management Council (the Council) during its September 2020 meeting. The temporary rule expired at noon on December 31, 2020. After expiration of the temporary rule, NMFS noted the need for two corrections.
This action corrects the regulations governing the West Coast Sablefish Primary fishery. The season dates for the sablefish primary fishery have historically run from April 1 until October 31 and were established in regulations under Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (August 7, 2001; 66 FR 41152). The amendatory instructions for the temporary rule (October 27, 2020; 85 FR 68001) were written incorrectly so that when the temporary rule expired, two important regulations were reserved rather than reinstated correctly. Specifically, the season dates codified at § 660.231(b)(1) were inadvertently removed and reserved. This correction will reinstate that paragraph which sets out the season dates for this fishery. The reinstated season dates are April 1 to October 31.
Additionally, NMFS inadvertently removed and reserved a paragraph referring to the season dates for the primary sablefish fishery at § 660.213(d)(2) as part of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for the fishery. This correction will reinstate that paragraph.
These two corrections are consistent with the Council action to extend the season length for the West Coast Sablefish Primary fishery temporarily for the 2020 fishing year, and are needed to correctly implement the intent of the Council's recommendation in September 2020. The substance of the text is unchanged from what was in existing regulations prior to the October 27, 2020 temporary rule.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (AA) finds there is good cause to waive prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on this action, as notice and comment would be unnecessary and contrary to public interest. Notice and comment are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest because this action corrects inadvertent errors related to the October 27, 2020 temporary rule. Immediate correction of the errors is necessary to prevent confusion among participants in the fishery that could result in issues with enforcement of season dates for the fishery. To effectively correct the errors, the changes in this action must be effective upon publication as the fishery will begin on April 1, 2021. Thus, there is not sufficient time for notice and comment. In addition, notice and comment is unnecessary because this correcting amendment reinstates previously established regulations and corrects inadvertent errors related to the October 27, 2020 temporary rule. These corrections will not affect the results of analyses conducted to support management decisions in the Pacific coast groundfish fishery. No change in operating practices in the fishery is required.
For the same reasons stated above, the AA has determined good cause exists to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d). This correcting amendment reinstates season dates in previously established regulations that should have been reinstated following expiration of the October 27 temporary rule. Delaying effectiveness of these corrections would result in conflicts in the regulations and confusion among fishery participants. Because prior notice and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be provided for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
This final rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
Fisheries, Fishing, and Indian Fisheries.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:
16 U.S.C. 1801
(d) * * *
(2) For participants in the sablefish primary season, the cumulative limit period to which this requirement
(b) * * *
(1)
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule; closure.
NMFS is prohibiting retention of Pacific cod by American Fisheries Act (AFA) trawl catcher/processors in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). This action is necessary because the Pacific cod total allowable catch allocated to AFA trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI has been reached.
Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), March 15, 2021, through 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31, 2021.
Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.
NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2021 Pacific cod total allowable catch allocated to AFA trawl catcher/processors is 2,571 metric tons (mt) as established by the final 2021 and 2022 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (86 FR 11449, February 25, 2021).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that the Pacific cod total allowable catch allocated to the AFA trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI has been reached. Therefore, NMFS is requiring that Pacific cod caught by AFA trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI be treated as prohibited species in accordance with § 679.21(b).
NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This action is required by 50 CFR part 679, which was issued pursuant to section 304(b), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), there is good cause to waive prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on this action, as notice and comment would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest, as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay prohibiting retention of Pacific cod by AFA trawl catcher/processors in the BSAI. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of March 12, 2021.
16 U.S.C. 1801
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Regulatory basis; request for comment; extension of comment period.
On January 29, 2021, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a document in the
The due date of comments requested in the document published on January 29, 2021 (86 FR 7513), is extended. Comments should be filed no later than May 14, 2021. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods; however, the NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal rulemaking website:
•
•
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the
James G. O'Driscoll, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; telephone: 301-415-1325; email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2009-0196 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Please include Docket ID NRC-2009-0196 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons to not include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. Please note that the NRC will not provide formal written responses to each of the comments received on the regulatory basis. However, the NRC will consider all comments received in the rulemaking process.
On January 29, 2021, the NRC published a document requesting comments on a regulatory basis to support a proposed rule that would amend the NRC's regulations to ensure consistency in new reactor licensing reviews, provide for an efficient new reactor licensing process, reduce the need for exemptions from existing regulations and license amendment requests, address other new reactor licensing issues deemed relevant by the NRC, and support the principles of good regulation, specifically openness, clarity, and reliability. The public comment period was originally scheduled to close on April 14, 2021. The NRC has decided to extend the public comment period on this document until May 14, 2021, to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit their comments.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC); Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC); Farm Credit Administration (FCA); and National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
Notice and request for comment.
The OCC, Board, FDIC, FCA, and NCUA (collectively, the Agencies) propose to supplement the Interagency Questions and Answers Regarding Flood Insurance with new questions and answers regarding the acceptance of flood insurance policies issued by private insurers pursuant to the Agencies' private flood insurance final rule issued in February 2019. These questions and answers will assist lenders in meeting their responsibilities under the final rule and increase public understanding of the Agencies' respective flood insurance regulations. The Agencies solicit comment on all aspects of these new questions and answers.
Comments on the proposed questions and answers must be submitted on or before May 17, 2021.
Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to:
•
•
•
You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this action by the following method:
•
The docket may be viewed after the close of the comment period in the same manner as during the comment period.
•
•
•
•
All public comments will be made available on the Board's website at
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
You may review copies of all comments we receive on our website at
•
•
•
•
The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Congress expanded the NFIP by enacting the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (FDPA).
Since 1997, the Interagency Questions and Answers
On June 18, 2019, prior to the effective date of the final rule, the Agencies hosted a webinar entitled “Interagency Flood Insurance Updates on Private Insurance Rule” to discuss updates to the Agencies' flood regulations concerning acceptance of private flood insurance policies.
On July 6, 2020, the Agencies issued proposed new and revised Interagency Questions and Answers (July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers) that covered a broad range of topics related to technical flood insurance-related issues, including the escrow of flood insurance premiums, the detached structure exemption to the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirement, and force-placement procedures.
As noted in the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers, the Agencies committed to separately issuing for notice and comment proposed questions and answers relating to the private flood insurance rule. Accordingly, the Agencies have carefully considered each of the many questions received on the private flood insurance rule since its issuance, categorized and consolidated the questions, and drafted 24 private flood insurance questions and answers to be broadly applicable to supervised lenders and servicers. The Agencies are now issuing for public comment these 24 proposed questions and answers, categorized in the three following sections:
To assist the reader, the Agencies have included references to specific Q&As from the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers and from other Q&As in this proposal when helpful. In addition, the following terms are used throughout this document: “Act” refers to the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as revised by the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 and Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act (codified at 42 U.S.C. 4001
The Agencies plan to publish a final document in the
The Agencies solicit comment on all aspects of the proposed questions and answers regarding the private flood insurance rule. If lenders, community groups, or other parties have unanswered questions or comments about the private flood insurance provision of the Regulation, they are invited to submit them to the Agencies in their comments.
The Agencies propose nine new Q&As to address issues regarding the mandatory acceptance and the application of the compliance aid assurance clause with respect to the private flood insurance provision of the Regulation. The new proposed Q&As would be designated as Mandatory 1-9. Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 1 would address whether a lender may decide to only accept private flood insurance policies under the mandatory acceptance provision of the Regulation. The proposed answer would confirm that a lender may decide to only accept flood insurance policies issued by a private insurer that the lender is required to accept because the policies meet the definition of “private flood
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 2 would address when a lender must review a flood policy issued by a private flood insurer to make sure the policy meets the mandatory acceptance criteria, other than at loan origination. The proposed response would explain that, other than at origination, a lender must review a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer when the policy is up for renewal, or any time the borrower presents the lender with any new flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer. The Agencies would clarify that a lender must review the policy in these instances in addition to when a triggering event occurs (making, increasing, extending or renewing a loan).
During this review, a lender may determine that the policy meets the mandatory acceptance criteria without further review if the policy or an endorsement to the policy includes the compliance aid assurance clause. However, if the policy does not meet the mandatory acceptance criteria, the lender may still accept it if it meets the discretionary acceptance criteria or, if applicable, the mutual aid plan criteria. The proposed answer would also explain that if the policy does not meet any such criteria, the lender must notify the borrower in accordance with the force placement provisions of the Regulation. If the borrower does not purchase flood insurance that complies with the Regulation, the lender must purchase insurance on the borrower's behalf. In addition, the Agencies would clarify that a lender may rely on a previous review of a flood insurance policy under the discretionary acceptance provision, provided there are no changes to the terms of the policy. However, as required by the Regulation and discussed below in proposed new Q&A Discretionary 4, the lender must document its conclusion regarding sufficient protection of the loan in writing. The Agencies are also including a reference to proposed new Q&A Discretionary 4.
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 3 would address whether the private flood insurance requirements under the Regulation require a lender to change its policy of not originating a mortgage in non-participating communities or coastal barrier regions where the NFIP is not available. The proposed answer would explain that the Regulation does not require a lender to originate a loan that does not meet the lender's underwriting criteria. The Agencies would note that the flood insurance purchase requirement only applies to loans secured by structures located or to be located in an SFHA in which flood insurance is available under the Act. As stated in proposed Q&A Applicability 1 in the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers, the flood insurance purchase requirement does not apply within non-participating communities where NFIP insurance is not available under the Act. Therefore, the proposed answer would state that the lender does not need to change its policy of not originating mortgages in areas where NFIP insurance is unavailable solely because of the private flood insurance requirements under the Regulation.
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 4 would address whether the compliance aid assurance clause could act as a conformity clause that would make a private policy conform to the definition of private flood insurance under the Regulation. The Agencies propose to clarify that the compliance aid assurance clause is not intended to act as a conformity clause but rather to facilitate the ability of lenders and consumers to recognize policies that meet the definition of “private flood insurance” and to promote the consistent acceptance of policies that meet this definition.
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 5 would provide that a lender is not required to accept a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer solely because the policy contains the compliance aid assurance clause if the lender chooses to conduct its own review and determines the flood insurance policy actually does not meet the mandatory acceptance requirements. The proposed answer also would note that if a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer does not include the compliance aid assurance clause, the lender must still review the policy to determine if it meets the requirements for private flood insurance as set forth in the Regulation before the lender may choose to reject the policy.
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 6 would discuss whether a lender is required to conduct an additional review of a flood insurance policy under the mandatory acceptance provision if the policy includes the compliance aid assurance clause. The proposed answer would state that under the mandatory acceptance provision of the Regulation, if a policy or an endorsement to the policy contains the compliance aid assurance clause, a lender is
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 7 would describe additional reviews a lender must conduct when a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer includes the compliance aid assurance clause, as the clause only assists a lender in making the determination that a flood insurance policy meets the definition of private flood insurance in the Regulation, and not other requirements specified in the Regulation. Specifically, the lender also must ensure that the coverage is at least equal to the lesser of the outstanding principal balance of the designated loan or the maximum limit of coverage available for the particular type of property under the Act, and also should ensure that other key aspects of the policy are accurate, such as the borrower's name and property address. The proposed answer would also include a reference to proposed new Q&A Mandatory 6.
Proposed new Q&A Mandatory 8 would address whether a lender may use the criteria under the discretionary acceptance provision to decide whether to accept a policy that does not contain the compliance aid assurance clause without first reviewing the policy to determine if it meets the mandatory acceptance provision. The proposed answer would clarify that a lender may first review the policy to determine whether it meets the criteria under the discretionary acceptance provision. However, if the policy is not accepted under the discretionary acceptance provision, the lender would still need to determine whether it
Lastly, new proposed Q&A Mandatory 9 would note that if the compliance aid assurance clause is included on the declarations page, a lender may accept the policy without further review to determine whether the policy meets the definition of private flood insurance. However, a lender must also ensure compliance with the mandatory purchase requirement.
The Agencies propose to add four new Q&As to provide additional clarity on the discretionary acceptance provision of the Regulation. These new Q&As would be designated as Discretionary 1-4. Proposed new Q&A Discretionary 1 would address whether lenders are required to accept flood insurance policies that meet the discretionary acceptance criteria. The proposed answer would note that the discretionary acceptance criteria in the Regulation set forth the minimum acceptable criteria that a flood insurance policy must have for the lender to accept the policy under the discretionary acceptance provision. The proposed answer would clarify that it is at the lender's discretion to accept a policy that meets the discretionary acceptance criteria so long as the policy does not meet the mandatory acceptance criteria.
Proposed new Q&A Discretionary 2 would address the requirements for documentation to demonstrate that a policy provides sufficient protection of a loan when a lender accepts that policy under the discretionary acceptance criteria. The proposed answer would explain that the Regulation requires the lender to document its conclusion in writing that the policy provides sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with safety and soundness principles. In addition, the proposed answer would include a reference to proposed Q&A Coverage 1 from the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers, which discusses some factors to consider when determining whether a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer provides sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with safety and soundness principles.
Proposed new Q&A Discretionary 3 would address how a lender could evaluate concerns related to an insurer's solvency, strength, and ability to pay claims in order to determine whether an insurance policy provides sufficient protection of a loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles. The proposed answer would provide that a lender may evaluate an insurer's solvency, strength, and ability to satisfy claims by obtaining information from the State insurance regulator's office of the State in which the property securing the loan is located, among other options. The proposed answer would further indicate that a lender could rely on the licensing or other processes used by the State insurance regulator for such an evaluation. The proposed answer would also include a reference to proposed Q&A Coverage 1 from the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers.
Proposed new Q&A Discretionary 4 would address whether a lender is required to review a flood insurance policy upon renewal if that policy was issued by a private insurer and was originally accepted in accordance with the discretionary acceptance requirements. The proposed answer would provide that if a lender had accepted a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer in accordance with the discretionary acceptance requirements and the policy is renewed, the lender would be required to review the policy upon renewal to ensure that it continues to meet the discretionary acceptance requirements. The proposed answer would also state that a lender would need to document its conclusion regarding sufficiency of the protection of the loan in writing upon each renewal to indicate that the policy continues to provide sufficient protection of the loan.
The Agencies propose to add 11 new Q&As on topics related to the private flood insurance provisions of the Regulation that are not covered in sections I and II above. The new proposed Q&As would be designated as Private Flood Compliance 1-11.
New proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 1 would address questions on the maximum deductible that a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer can have for properties located in an SFHA. Under the proposed answer, the Agencies would clarify that the analysis would depend on whether the lender is accepting the flood insurance policy under the mandatory acceptance provision or the discretionary acceptance provision.
Specifically, for a private flood insurance policy that the lender is accepting under the mandatory acceptance provision, the proposed answer would state that the Regulation provides that the policy must contain a deductible that is “at least as broad as” the maximum deductible in the Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP) under the NFIP, which means that the deductible is no higher than the specified maximum under an SFIP for any total coverage amount up to the maximum available under the NFIP at the time the policy is provided to the lender. The proposed answer would provide that a policy with a coverage amount exceeding that available under the NFIP may have a deductible exceeding the specific maximum deductible under an SFIP. However, the proposed answer would also advise that for safety and soundness purposes, the lender should consider whether the deductible is reasonable based on the borrower's financial condition, consistent with guidance the Agencies proposed in Q&A Amount 9
The Agencies note that this proposed guidance regarding the deductible for a private flood insurance policy with a coverage amount exceeding that available under the NFIP is different from the informal advice the Agencies previously provided in supplementary information to the private flood insurance rule.
Proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 1 would also provide guidance for accepting flood insurance policies issued by private insurers under the discretionary acceptance provision. Under the Regulation, the policy must provide sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles. Proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 1 would note that among the factors a lender could consider in determining whether a policy provides sufficient protection of a loan is whether the policy's deductible is reasonable based on the borrower's financial condition. Therefore, unlike the limitation on deductibles for policies accepted under the mandatory acceptance provision for any total coverage amount up to the maximum available under the NFIP, the proposed answer would provide that a lender can accept a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer under the discretionary acceptance provision with a deductible higher than that for an SFIP for a similar type of property, provided the lender has determined the policy provides sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles.
Proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 1 would also include a reminder that, consistent with the guidance provided in proposed Q&A Amount 9 in the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers, a lender may not allow the borrower to use a deductible amount equal to the insurable value of the property to avoid the mandatory purchase requirement for flood insurance. This principle would apply whether the lender is evaluating the policy under the mandatory acceptance provision or the discretionary acceptance provision.
The Agencies also received questions on whether a lender may require that the deductible of any flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer be lower than the maximum deductible for an NFIP policy. New proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 2 would clarify that a lender may do so under both the mandatory acceptance provision and the discretionary acceptance provision. For the mandatory acceptance provision, the Regulation requires that the private flood insurance policy be at least as broad as an NFIP policy, which includes a requirement that the private flood insurance policy contain a deductible
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 3 would provide guidance regarding whether a lender may charge fees to the borrower for the lender's use of a third party to review flood insurance policies. The proposed answer would provide that the Act and the Regulation do not prohibit lenders from charging fees to borrowers for contracting with a third party to review flood insurance policies, with references to Q&A Fees 1 and Q&A Fees 2 proposed in the July 2020 Proposed Questions and Answers.
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 4 addresses the lender's responsibility to ensure a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer meets the requirements of the Regulation if the policy is not available prior to loan closing. The proposed answer would provide that the Act and Regulation do not specify the acceptable types of documentation for a lender to rely on when reviewing a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer. The proposed answer also would advise that lenders should determine whether they have sufficient evidence to show the policy meets the requirements under the Regulation and that if the lender does not have enough information to determine if the policy meets the private flood insurance requirements under the Regulation, then the lender should timely request additional information as necessary to complete its review. The proposed answer also would suggest some optional steps that a lender could take to mitigate against closing delays.
The Agencies received many questions requesting guidance on whether a declarations page provides sufficient information for a lender to determine whether the policy complies with the Regulation. Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 5 would note that the answer depends on the information contained in the declarations page. Under the proposed answer, if the declarations page provides sufficient information for the lender to determine whether the policy meets the mandatory acceptance provision or the discretionary acceptance provision of the Regulation or if the declarations pages contains the compliance aid assurance clause, then the lender may rely on the declarations page. However, if the declarations page does not provide sufficient information for the lender to determine whether the policy satisfies the mandatory acceptance or the discretionary acceptance provision of the Regulation, the proposed answer would suggest that the lender should request additional information about the policy to aid its determination.
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 6 would provide guidance on a lender's ability to accept multiple-peril policies. Specifically, the proposed answer would clarify that a lender may accept multiple-peril policies that cover the hazard of flood under the private flood insurance provisions of the Regulation, provided they meet the requirements of the Regulation.
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 7 would address the question of how the private flood insurance requirements of the Regulation would work in conjunction with requirements of secondary market investors, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). The proposed answer would first remind lenders that they must comply with the Federal flood insurance requirements. The proposed answer would then note that secondary market investor requirements are separate from the requirements of the Regulation. Therefore, if a lender plans to sell loans to such an investor, the proposed answer would advise that a lender should carefully review the investor's requirements and direct questions regarding these requirements to the appropriate entities.
The Agencies are proposing new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 8 to provide guidance to servicers for loans covered by flood insurance mandated by the Act. Specifically, the proposed answer would clarify that for loans serviced on behalf of lenders supervised by the Agencies, the servicer must comply with the Regulation in determining whether a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer must be accepted under the mandatory acceptance provision or may be accepted under the discretionary acceptance or mutual aid provisions. However, for loans serviced on behalf of other entities not supervised by the Agencies, the proposed answer would state that the servicer should comply with the terms of its contract with such an entity. The proposed answer would suggest that when servicing loans on behalf of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, where there are insurer rating requirements specified within those entities' servicing guidance or other relevant authorities that are not included in the Regulation, the servicer should adhere to those servicing requirements.
The Agencies also propose to add three new Q&As to provide guidance regarding optional methods lenders can use to address questions on whether an insurer is licensed, admitted, or otherwise approved to do business in a particular State, which is one of the factors lenders must evaluate under both the mandatory acceptance and discretionary acceptance provisions. Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 9 would explain how a lender could determine whether an insurer is licensed, admitted, or otherwise approved in a particular State, or whether a surplus lines
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 10 would address whether lenders may accept policies issued by private insurers that are surplus lines insurers for noncommercial residential properties. The proposed answer would explain that if the surplus lines insurer is eligible or not disapproved to place insurance in the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located, lenders may accept policies issued by surplus lines insurers as coverage for noncommercial (
As noted above, if the surplus lines insurer is eligible or not disapproved to place insurance in the State or jurisdiction in which a property to be insured is located, the surplus lines insurer is deemed to be “otherwise approved to engage in the business of insurance by the insurance regulator of the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located” for purposes of the Act and Regulation. Therefore, the proposed answer would note that even if the surplus lines insurer is not considered to be engaged in the business of insurance under applicable State law, the surplus lines insurer nevertheless would meet the criteria
For example, under section 1776 of the California Insurance Code, the
Proposed new Q&A Private Flood Compliance 11 would address whether a lender may accept a private flood insurance policy that includes a compliance aid assurance clause, but also includes a disclaimer that the “insurer is not licensed in the State or jurisdiction in which the property is located.” The proposed answer would explain that there are circumstances under which lenders may accept a policy issued by an insurer that is not licensed in the State or jurisdiction in which the property is located. For example, a lender would be able to accept a policy issued by a surplus lines insurer recognized or not disapproved by the relevant State insurance regulator as protection for loan collateral that is a nonresidential commercial property. The proposed answer would also provide that a lender may accept a policy issued by a surplus lines insurer as protection for loan collateral that includes residential property as a policy issued by an insurance company that is “otherwise approved to engage in the business of insurance by the insurance regulator of the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located.” The proposed answer would include a cross-reference to proposed Q&A Private Flood Compliance 10.
Yes. A lender is only required to accept flood insurance policies issued by a private insurer that meet the definition of “private flood insurance” under the Regulation. A lender is not required to accept flood insurance policies that only meet the criteria set forth in the discretionary acceptance or mutual aid provision of the Regulation.
Once a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer comes up for renewal or any time the borrower presents the lender with any new flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer, regardless of whether a triggering event occurred (making, increasing, extending or renewing a loan), the lender must review the policy to determine whether it meets the mandatory acceptance criteria.
If the lender has previously reviewed the flood insurance policy under the discretionary acceptance provision to ensure that the policy meets the private flood insurance requirements of the Regulation, the lender may rely on its previous review, provided there are no changes to the terms of the policy. However, as required by the Regulation, the lender must document its conclusion regarding sufficiency of protection of the loan in writing.
The Regulation does not require that a lender originate a loan that does not meet the lender's underwriting criteria. The Agencies note that the flood insurance purchase requirement only applies to loans secured by structures located or to be located in an SFHA in which flood insurance is available under the Act.
No. The Agencies did not intend the compliance aid assurance clause to act as a conformity clause. Rather, the compliance aid assurance clause is intended to facilitate the ability of lenders, as well as consumers, to recognize policies that meet the definition of “private flood insurance” and promote the consistent acceptance of policies that meet this definition. The compliance aid provision is intended to leverage the expertise of insurers to assist lenders in satisfying the requirements of the Regulation.
A lender is not required to accept a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer solely because the policy contains the compliance aid assurance clause if the lender chooses to conduct its own review and determines the flood insurance policy actually does not meet the mandatory acceptance requirements.
If a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer does not include the compliance aid assurance clause, the lender must still review the policy to determine if it meets the requirements for private flood insurance as set forth in the Regulation before the lender may choose to reject the policy.
No, under the mandatory acceptance provision of the Regulation, if a policy or an endorsement to the policy contains the compliance aid assurance clause, further review is not necessary in order for the lender to determine that a policy meets the definition of “private flood insurance.”
It is important to note that, in order for the lender to rely on the compliance aid assurance clause without further review of the policy, the language of the compliance aid assurance clause must be stated in the policy, or as an endorsement to the policy, as set forth in the Regulation. If the language is different from the compliance aid assurance clause set forth in the Regulation, the lender cannot rely on the protections of the compliance aid assurance clause in the Regulation and should review the policy to determine if it meets the definition of private flood insurance. However, a policy containing the compliance aid assurance clause need not be rejected if there are stylistic differences, such as formatting, font, and punctuation that do not change the substantive meaning of the clause, from the compliance aid assurance clause included in the Regulation.
Although a lender may rely on the compliance aid assurance clause to determine that a flood insurance policy meets the definition of private flood insurance in the Regulation, the lender must also ensure that the coverage is at least equal to the lesser of the outstanding principal balance of the designated loan, or the maximum limit of coverage available for the particular type of property under the Act.
Yes, the lender may first review the policy to determine whether it meets the criteria under the discretionary acceptance provision.
Note that if the lender accepts a policy under the discretionary acceptance provision, the Regulation requires the lender to document that the policy provides sufficient protection of the loan.
If the compliance aid assurance clause is included on the declarations page, a lender may accept the policy without further review to determine whether the policy meets the definition of private flood insurance. However, a lender must also ensure compliance with the mandatory purchase requirement.
No, the discretionary acceptance criteria in the Regulation sets forth the minimum acceptable criteria that a flood insurance policy must have for the lender to accept the policy under the discretionary acceptance provision. It is at the lender's discretion to accept a policy that meets the discretionary acceptance criteria so long as the policy does not meet the mandatory acceptance criteria.
The Regulation requires the lender to document its conclusion in writing that the policy provides sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles (s
A lender may evaluate an insurer's solvency, strength, and ability to satisfy claims by obtaining information from the State insurance regulator's office of the State in which the property securing the loan is located, among other options. A lender can rely on the licensing or other processes used by the State insurance regulator for such an evaluation.
If a lender had accepted a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer in accordance with the discretionary acceptance requirements and the policy is renewed, the lender must review the policy upon renewal to ensure that it continues to meet the discretionary acceptance requirements.
The maximum deductible for a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer varies depending on whether the lender accepts the policy under the mandatory acceptance or the discretionary acceptance provision. For purposes of compliance with the mandatory acceptance provision, the Regulation provides that a policy must contain a deductible that is “at least as broad as” in a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP)—
• For example, if a private policy for a commercial building provided $1,000,000 of flood insurance coverage, which is in excess of the NFIP maximum coverage of $500,000 for a commercial building, then it would be acceptable for a million-dollar policy to have a deductible higher than the maximum deductible for a policy available under the NFIP. The lender should consider whether the deductible is reasonable based on the borrower's financial condition.
• Similarly, if a private policy for a residential building provided $1,000,000 of flood insurance coverage, which is in excess of the NFIP maximum coverage of $250,000 for a residential building, then it would be acceptable for a million-dollar policy to have a deductible higher than the maximum deductible for a policy available under the NFIP. The lender should consider whether the deductible is reasonable based on the borrower's financial condition.
For purposes of compliance with the discretionary acceptance provision, the Regulation requires that the policy provide sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles.
Whether the lender is evaluating the policy under the mandatory acceptance provision or the discretionary acceptance provision, a lender may not allow the borrower to use a deductible amount equal to the insurable value of the property to avoid the mandatory purchase requirement for flood insurance.
Yes. If the lender is accepting the private flood insurance policy under the mandatory acceptance provision, the Regulation requires that the private flood insurance policy be at least as broad as an NFIP policy, which includes a requirement that the private flood insurance policy contain a deductible
If the lender is accepting a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer under the discretionary acceptance provision, the lender need only consider whether the policy, including the stated deductible, provides sufficient protection of the loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles.
The Act and the Regulation do not prohibit lenders from charging fees to borrowers for contracting with third parties to review flood insurance policies. As explained in Q&A Fees 1 and Q&A Fees 2, lenders may charge limited, reasonable fees for flood determinations and life-of-loan monitoring. Similarly, the Act and the Regulation do not prohibit lenders from charging a fee to a borrower when a third party reviews a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer. However, lenders should be aware of any other applicable requirements regarding fees and disclosures of fees.
The Act and Regulation do not specify the acceptable types of documentation for a lender to rely on when reviewing a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer. Lenders should determine whether they have sufficient evidence to show the policy meets the requirements under the Regulation.
Lenders can take steps to help mitigate against closing delays such as designating employees responsible for reviewing flood policies, training employees, and requesting additional information from insurers early in the process. If the lender does not have enough information to determine if the policy meets the private flood insurance requirements under the Regulation, then the lender should timely request additional information as necessary to complete its review.
It depends. If the declarations page provides enough information for the lender to determine whether the policy meets the mandatory acceptance provision or discretionary acceptance provision of the Regulation or if the declarations pages contains the compliance aid assurance clause, then the lender may rely on the declarations pages. However, if the declarations page does not provide enough information for the lender to determine whether the policy satisfies the mandatory acceptance provision or discretionary acceptance provision of the Regulation, the lender should request additional information about the policy to aid in making its determination.
Yes. A lender can accept a multiple-peril policy that covers the hazard of flood under the private flood insurance provisions of the Regulation, provided the policy meets the requirements under the Regulation.
Lenders must comply with Federal flood insurance requirements. The requirements for the secondary market are separate from the Regulation. A lender should carefully review these separate requirements for secondary market investors regarding acceptable private flood insurance if the lender plans to sell loans to such investors and should direct questions regarding these requirements to the appropriate entities.
For loans serviced on behalf of lenders supervised by the Agencies, the servicer must comply with the Regulation in determining whether a flood insurance policy issued by a private insurer must be accepted under the mandatory acceptance provision or may be accepted under the discretionary acceptance provision or mutual aid provision. For loans serviced on behalf of other entities not supervised by the Agencies, the servicer should comply with the terms of its contract with that entity. For example, when servicing loans on behalf of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, where there are insurer rating requirements specified within those entities' servicing guidance or other relevant authorities that are not required in the Regulation, the servicer should adhere to those servicing requirements.
A lender may refer to the website of the State insurance regulator where the collateral property is located to determine whether a particular insurer is licensed, admitted, or otherwise permitted to issue an insurance policy in a particular State. If the lender cannot determine this information from the website, the lender could contact the State insurance regulator directly. Further, information with respect to surplus lines insurer eligibility also may be available in the Consumer Insurance Search (CIS) tool available on the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) website. Lenders may consult commercial service providers regarding the eligibility of surplus lines insurers in particular States provided the lenders have a reasonable basis to believe that these service providers have reliable information.
With regard to nonadmitted alien insurers in particular, lenders could review the NAIC's Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers.
Yes, if the surplus lines insurer is eligible or not disapproved to place insurance in the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located, lenders may accept policies issued by surplus lines insurers as coverage for noncommercial (
Consistent with the Act and the Regulation, the Agencies confirm that policies issued by surplus lines insurers for noncommercial properties are covered in the definition of “private flood insurance” and in the discretionary acceptance provision. In the definition of “private flood insurance,” surplus lines policies for noncommercial properties are covered as policies that are issued by insurance companies that are “otherwise approved to engage in the business of insurance by the insurance regulator of the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located.”
For purposes of the Regulation, the meaning of “otherwise approved” is
Even if the policy includes a statement indicating that the insurer is not licensed in the State or jurisdiction in which the property is located, suggesting that the policy is issued by a surplus lines insurer, there are circumstances under which lenders may accept the policy. A lender may accept a policy issued by a surplus lines insurer recognized or not disapproved by the relevant State insurance regulator as protection for loan collateral that is a commercial property. Also, a lender may accept a policy issued by a surplus lines insurer as protection for loan collateral that is a noncommercial property as a policy issued by an insurance company that is “otherwise approved to engage in the business of insurance by the insurance regulator of the State or jurisdiction in which the property to be insured is located.”
Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Drug Enforcement Administration proposes placing ethyl (1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)(phenyl)carbamate (fentanyl carbamate),
Comments must be submitted electronically or postmarked on or before April 19, 2021.
Requests for hearing and waivers of an opportunity for a hearing or to participate in a hearing must be received on or before April 19, 2021.
To ensure proper handling of comments, please reference “Docket No. DEA-806” on all electronic and written correspondence, including any attachments.
•
•
•
Terrence L. Boos, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (571) 362-3249.
Please note that all comments received in response to this docket are considered part of the public record. They will, unless reasonable cause is given, be made available by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for public inspection online at
If you want to submit confidential business information as part of your comment, but do not want it to be made publicly available, you must include the phrase “CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION” in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential business information to be redacted within the comment.
Comments containing personal identifying information and confidential business information identified as directed above will be made publicly available in redacted form. If a comment has so much confidential business information or personal identifying information that it cannot be effectively redacted, all or part of that comment may not be made publicly available. Comments posted to
An electronic copy of this document and supplemental information to this proposed rule are available at
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(a), this action is a formal rulemaking “on the record after opportunity for a hearing.” Such proceedings are conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551-559. 21 CFR 1308.41-1308.45; 21 CFR part 1316, subpart D. Interested persons may file requests for hearing or notices of intent to participate in a hearing in conformity with the requirements of 21 CFR 1308.44(a) or (b), and include a statement of interest in the proceeding and the objections or issues, if any, concerning which the person desires to be heard. Any interested person may file a waiver of an opportunity for a hearing or to participate in a hearing together with a written statement regarding the interested person's position on the matters of fact and law involved in any hearing as set forth in 21 CFR 1308.44(c).
All requests for a hearing and waivers of participation must be sent to DEA using the address information provided above.
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) provides that proceedings for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of the scheduling of any drug or other substance may be initiated by the Attorney General (delegated to the Administrator of DEA pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100) on his own motion. 21 U.S.C. 811(a). This proposed action is supported by a recommendation from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Health of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (Acting Assistant Secretary) and an evaluation of all other relevant data by DEA. If finalized, this action would make permanent the existing temporary regulatory controls and administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions of schedule I controlled substances on any person who handles or proposes to handle fentanyl carbamate,
On February 6, 2018, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), the then-Acting Administrator of DEA published an order in the
That temporary order was effective upon the date of publication. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(2), the temporary control of fentanyl-related substances, a class of substances as defined in the order, as well as the four specific substances already covered by that order, was set to expire on February 6, 2020. However, as explained in DEA's April 10, 2020, correcting amendment (85 FR 20155), Congress overrode and extended that expiration date until May 6, 2021, by enacting on February 6, 2020 the Temporary Reauthorization and Study of the Emergency Scheduling of Fentanyl Analogues Act (Pub. L. 116-114, sec. 2, 134 Stat. 103). By operation of law, the temporary control of fentanyl-related substances, which includes these four covered substances, will remain in effect until May 6, 2021, unless DEA permanently places them in schedule I prior to May 6, 2021. As discussed in the above Legal Authority section, proceedings under 21 U.S.C. 811(a) may be initiated by the Administrator of DEA on his own motion.
The Acting Administrator, on his own motion, is initiating proceedings to permanently schedule the following four fentanyl-related substances: Fentanyl carbamate,
On March 2, 2021, the Acting Assistant Secretary submitted to the Acting Administrator, HHS's scientific and medical evaluation and scheduling recommendation for the four fentanyl-related substances named in this proposed rule. Upon receipt of the scientific and medical evaluation and scheduling recommendation from HHS, DEA reviewed these documents and all other relevant data, and conducted its own eight-factor analysis of the abuse potential of the four substances in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(c).
As discussed in the background section, the Acting Administrator is initiating proceedings to permanently add fentanyl carbamate,
1.
The abuse potential of fentanyl carbamate,
These four substances have no approved medical use in the United States and have been encountered on the illicit drug market. The use of some fentanyl-related substances has been associated with adverse health outcomes, including death. The appearance of several substances structurally related to fentanyl in the illicit drug market has resulted in a significant increase in drug overdose deaths in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) overdose death data for 2019, there continues to be an increase in the number of deaths related to synthetic opioids. Opioids were involved in about 71 percent of all drug-involved overdose deaths in 2019. Further, CDC reports demonstrate that the increase in synthetic opioid overdose deaths are largely attributed to an increase in the supply of illicitly manufactured fentanyl and substances structurally related to fentanyl. Because fentanyl carbamate,
There are no legitimate drug channels for fentanyl carbamate,
2.
3.
(A) Replacement of the phenyl portion of the phenethyl group by any monocycle, whether or not further substituted in or on the monocycle;
(B) Substitution in or on the phenethyl group with alkyl, alkenyl, alkoxyl, hydroxyl, halo, haloalkyl, amino or nitro groups;
(C) Substitution in or on the piperidine ring with alkyl, alkenyl, alkoxyl, ester, ether, hydroxyl, halo, haloalkyl, amino or nitro groups;
(D) Replacement of the aniline ring with any aromatic monocycle whether or not further substituted in or on the aromatic monocycle; and/or
(E) Replacement of the
According to the February 6, 2018, temporary scheduling order, the existence of a substance with any one, or any combination, of above-mentioned modifications (see Figure 1) would meet the structural requirements of the definition of fentanyl-related substances. The present four substances fall within the definition of fentanyl-related substances by the following modifications:
1. Fentanyl carbamate: Replacement of the
2.
3.
4.
No study has been undertaken to evaluate the efficacy, toxicology, and safety of the four substances in humans. It can be inferred from data obtained from animal studies that these four substances have sufficient distribution to the brain to produce depressant effects similar to that of other mu-opioid receptor agonists such as fentanyl. Data from
There are no FDA-approved marketing applications for a drug product containing fentanyl carbamate,
4.
5.
6.
According to a CDC report, from 2013 to 2019, deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone increased by 1,040 percent from 3,105 to 36,359. The increase in the number of opioid-related deaths was primarily driven by illicitly manufactured fentanyl.
7.
8.
The CSA establishes five schedules of controlled substances known as schedules I, II, III, IV, and V. The CSA also outlines the findings required to place a drug or other substance in any particular schedule. 21 U.S.C. 812(b). After consideration of the analysis and recommendation of the Acting Assistant Secretary for Health of HHS and review of all other available data, the Acting Administrator of DEA, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(a) and 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1), finds that:
According to HHS, fentanyl carbamate,
According to HHS, there are no FDA-approved new drug applications for fentanyl carbamate,
i. The drug's chemistry must be known and reproducible;
ii. there must be adequate safety studies;
iii. there must be adequate and well-controlled studies proving efficacy;
iv. the drug must be accepted by qualified experts; and
v.
57 FR 10499 (1992),
Because fentanyl carbamate,
Based on these findings, the Acting Administrator of DEA concludes that fentanyl carbamate,
If this rule is finalized as proposed, fentanyl carbamate,
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
After the initial inventory, every DEA registrant must take a new inventory of all stocks of controlled substances (including fentanyl carbamate,
6.
In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a), this proposed scheduling action is subject to formal rulemaking procedures done “on the record after opportunity for a hearing,” which are conducted pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. The CSA sets forth the criteria for scheduling a drug or other substance. Such actions are exempt from review by the Office of
This proposed regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988 to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize litigation, provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, and promote simplification and burden reduction.
This proposed rulemaking does not have federalism implications warranting the application of E.O. 13132. The proposed rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications warranting the application of E.O. 13175. It does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The Acting Administrator, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, has reviewed this proposed rule and by approving it, certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. On February 6, 2018, DEA published an order to temporarily place fentanyl-related substances, as defined in the order, in schedule I of the CSA pursuant to the temporary scheduling provisions of 21 U.S.C. 811(h). DEA estimates that all entities handling or planning to handle fentanyl carbamate,
There are currently 90 unique registrations authorized to specifically handle the fentanyl-related substances as a class, which include fentanyl carbamate,
A review of the 90 registrations indicates that all entities that currently handle fentanyl-related substances, including fentanyl carbamate,
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501
This action does not impose a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521. This action would not impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out above, DEA proposes to amend 21 CFR part 1308 as follows:
21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), 956(b), unless otherwise noted.
The additions read as follows:
(b) * * *
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is proposing to establish temporary special local regulations for certain waters of the Choptank River. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters located between Trappe, Talbot County, MD, and Cambridge, Dorchester County, MD, during a swim event on May 16, 2021. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 19, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2021-0103 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST2 Shaun Landante, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region Waterways Management Division; telephone 410-576-2570, email
On February 15, 2021, the TCR Event Management of St. Michaels, MD, notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting the Maryland Freedom Swim from 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. on May 16, 2021. The open water swim consists of approximately 200 participants competing on a designated 1.75-mile linear course. The course starts at the beach of Bill Burton Fishing Pier State Park at Trappe, MD, proceeds across the Choptank River along and between the fishing piers and the Senator Frederick C. Malkus, Jr. Memorial (US-50) Bridge, and finishes at the beach of the Dorchester County Visitors Center at Cambridge, MD. Hazards from the swim competition include participants swimming within and adjacent to the designated navigation channel and interfering with vessels intending to operate within that channel, as well as swimming within approaches to local public and private marinas and public boat facilities. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region has determined that potential hazards associated with the swim would be a safety concern for anyone intending to participate in this event and for vessels that operate within specified waters of the Choptank River.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect event participants, non-participants, and transiting vessels before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region is proposing to establish special local regulations from 6 a.m. through 10:30 a.m. on May 16, 2021. There is no alternate date planned for this event. The regulated area would cover all navigable waters of the Choptank River, from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded on the east by a line drawn from latitude 38°35′14.2″ N, longitude 076°02′33.0″ W, thence south to latitude 38°34′08.3″ N, longitude 076°03′36.2″ W, and bounded on the west by a line drawn from latitude 38°35′32.7″ N, longitude 076°02′58.3″ W, thence south to latitude 38°34′24.7″ N, longitude 076°04′01.3″ W, located at Cambridge, MD. The regulated area is approximately 2,800 yards in length and 900 yards in width. The proposed duration of the rule and size of the regulated area are intended to ensure the safety of life on these navigable waters before, during, and after the open water swim, scheduled to take place from 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. on May 16, 2021. The COTP and the Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM) would have authority to forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area.
Except for Maryland Freedom Swim participants and vessels already at berth, a vessel or person would be required to get permission from the COTP or PATCOM before entering the regulated area. Vessel operators would be able to request permission to enter and transit through the regulated area by contacting the PATCOM on VHF-FM channel 16. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the PATCOM deems it safe to do so. A person or vessel not registered with the event sponsor as a participant or assigned as official patrols would be considered a non-participant. Official Patrols are any vessel assigned or approved by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
If permission is granted by the COTP or PATCOM, a person or vessel would be allowed to enter the regulated area or pass directly through the regulated area as instructed. Vessels would be required to operate at a safe speed that minimizes wake while within the regulated area. Official patrol vessels would direct non-participants while within the regulated area.
The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive
This regulatory action determination is based on size, time of day and duration of the regulated area, which would impact a small designated area of the Choptank River for 4 hours. The Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated area, and vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the PATCOM deems it safe to do so.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves implementation of regulations within 33 CFR part 100 applicable to organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States that could negatively impact the safety of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area lasting for 4 hours and 30 minutes. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L[61] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region at telephone number 410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or the PATCOM on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Those in the regulated area must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM.
(3) The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region will provide notice of the regulated area through advanced notice via Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners, broadcast notice to mariners, and on-scene official patrols.
(d)
(e)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is proposing to establish special local regulations for certain waters of the North Atlantic Ocean. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters located at Ocean City, MD, during a high-speed power boat racing event on May 2, 2021. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or Coast Guard Event Patrol Commander. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 2, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2021-0137 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST2 Shaun Landante, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region; telephone 410-576-2570, email
OPA Racing LLC of Brick Township, NJ, has notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting the Ocean City Offshore Grand Prix from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. on May 2, 2021. The high-speed power boat event consists of approximately 40 participating offshore race boats of various classes, 21 to 50 feet in length, operating along a designated, marked racetrack-type course located in the North Atlantic Ocean, at Ocean City, MD. Hazards from the high-speed power boat racing event include participants operating near a designated navigation channel, as well as injury to persons and damage to property that involve vessel mishaps during high-speed power boat races conducted on navigable waters located near the shoreline. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region has determined that potential hazards associated with the high-speed power boat races would be a safety concern for anyone intending to operate within certain waters of the North Atlantic Ocean at Ocean City, MD, operating in or near the event area. The Coast Guard is requesting that interested
The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect event participants, non-participants, and transiting vessels before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region proposes to establish special local regulations from 10 a.m. through 6 p.m. on May 2, 2021. There is no alternate date planned for this event. The regulated area would cover all navigable waters of the North Atlantic Ocean, within an area bounded by the following coordinates: Commencing at a point near the shoreline at latitude 38°21′42″ N, longitude 075°04′11″ W, thence east to latitude 38°21′33″ N, longitude 075°03′10″ W, thence southwest to latitude 38°19′25″ N, longitude 075°04′02″ W, thence west to the shoreline at latitude 38°19′35″ N, longitude 075°05′02″ W, at Ocean City, MD. The regulated area is approximately 4,500 yards in length and 1,600 yards in width.
This proposed rule provides additional information about areas within the regulated area and their definitions. These areas include “Race Area,” “Buffer Area,” and “Spectator Area.”
The proposed size of the regulated area are intended to ensure the safety of life on these navigable waters before, during, and after the high-speed power boat racing event, scheduled from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. on May 2, 2021. The COTP and the Coast Guard Event Patrol Commander (PATCOM) would have authority to forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the regulated area would be required to immediately comply with the directions given by the COTP or Event PATCOM. If a person or vessel fails to follow such directions, the Coast Guard may expel them from the area, issue them a citation for failure to comply, or both.
Except for Ocean City Grand Prix participants and vessels already at berth, a vessel or person would be required to get permission from the COTP or Event PATCOM before entering the regulated area. Vessel operators can request permission to enter and transit through the regulated area by contacting the Event PATCOM on VHF-FM channel 16. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the Event PATCOM deems it safe to do so. A person or vessel not registered with the event sponsor as a participant or assigned as official patrols would be considered a spectator. Official Patrols are any vessel assigned or approved by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
If permission is granted by the COTP or Event PATCOM, a person or vessel would be allowed to enter the regulated area or pass directly through the regulated area as instructed. Vessels would be required to operate at a safe speed that minimizes wake while within the regulated area. Official patrol vessels will direct spectator vessels while within the regulated area. Only participant vessels and official patrol vessels would be allowed to enter the race area.
The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size and location of the regulated area. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this regulated area, which would impact a small designated area of the North Atlantic Ocean for 8 hours. The Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated area, and vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the Event PATCOM deems it safe to do so.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves implementation of regulations within 33 CFR part 100 applicable to organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States that could negatively impact the safety of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area lasting for eight hours. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and public comments, will be in our online docket at
Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70041;33 CFR 1.05-1.
(a)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(b) Definitions. As used in this section:
(c)
(2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, a person or vessel within the regulated area at the start of enforcement of this section must immediately depart the regulated area.
(3) A spectator must contact the Event PATCOM to request permission to either enter or pass through the regulated area. The Event PATCOM, and official patrol vessels enforcing this regulated area, can be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz). If permission is granted, the spectator must pass directly through the regulated area as instructed by Event PATCOM. A vessel within the regulated area must operate at safe speed that minimizes wake.
(4) Only participant vessels and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the race area.
(5) A person or vessel that desires to transit, moor, or anchor within the regulated area must obtain authorization from the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM. A person or vessel seeking such permission can contact the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region at telephone number 410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or the PATCOM on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
(6) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event date and times.
(d)
(e)
U.S. Codex Office, USDA.
Notice of public meeting and request for comments.
The U.S Codex Office is sponsoring a public meeting on April 12, 2021. The objective of the public meeting is to provide information and receive public comments on agenda items and draft United States (U.S.) positions to be discussed at the 14th Session of the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Foods (CCCF) of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius and the Acting Deputy Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs recognize the importance of providing interested parties the opportunity to obtain background information on the 14th Session of the CCCF and to address items on the agenda.
The public meeting is scheduled for April 12, 2021 from 1:00-4:00 p.m. EDT.
The public meeting will take place virtually. Documents related to the 14th Session of the CCCF will be accessible via the internet at the following address:
Dr. Lauren Posnick Robin, U.S. Delegate to the 14th Session of the CCCF, invites U.S. interested parties to submit their comments electronically to Dr. Henry Kim at the following email address:
For Further Information about the 14th Session of the CCCF and the Public Meeting, contact Henry Kim, Ph.D., FDA, at
Codex was established in 1963 by two United Nations organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through adoption of food standards, codes of practice, and other guidelines developed by its committees, and by promoting their adoption and implementation by governments, Codex seeks to protect the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in the food trade.
The Terms of Reference of the CCCF are:
(a) To establish or endorse permitted maximum levels or guidelines levels for contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants in food and feed;
(b) to prepare priority lists of contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants for risk assessment by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives;
(c) to consider methods of analysis and sampling for the determination of contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants in food and feed;
(d) to consider and elaborate standards or codes of practice for related subjects; and
(e) to consider other matters assigned to it by the Commission in relation to contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants in food and feed.
The CCCF is chaired by the Netherlands. The United States attends the CCCF as a member country of Codex.
The following items on the Agenda for the 14th Session of the CCCF will be discussed during the public meeting:
At the April 12th public meeting, draft U.S. positions on the agenda items will be described and discussed, and attendees will have the opportunity to pose questions and offer comments. Written comments may be offered at the meeting or sent to Dr. Henry Kim at
Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, the U.S. Codex Office will announce this
No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs, exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to discrimination any person in the United States under any program or activity conducted by the USDA.
To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
Commission on Civil Rights.
Notice; cancellation of meeting.
The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the
Barbara Delaviez, (202) 618-4158,
Bureau of Economic Analysis, Commerce.
Notice of reporting requirements.
By this Notice, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Department of Commerce, is informing the public that it is conducting the mandatory survey titled Quarterly Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States—Transactions of U.S. Affiliate with Foreign Parent (BE-605). The data collected on the BE-605 survey are needed to measure the size and economic significance of foreign direct investment in the United States and its impact on the U.S. economy. This survey is authorized by the International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act.
Jessica Hanson, Chief, Direct Transactions and Positions Branch (BE-49), via phone (301) 278-9595 or via email at
Through this Notice, BEA publishes the reporting requirements for the BE-605 survey form. As noted below, all entities required to respond to this mandatory survey will be contacted by BEA. Entities must submit the completed survey forms within 30 days after the end of each calendar or fiscal quarter, or within 45 days if the report is for the final quarter of the financial reporting year. This Notice is being issued in conformance with the rule BEA issued on April 24, 2012 (77 FR 24373), establishing guidelines for collecting data on international trade in services and direct investment through notices, rather than through rulemaking. Additional information about BEA's collection of data on international trade in services and direct investment can be found in the 2012 rule, the International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act (22 U.S.C. 3101
Notice of specific reporting requirements, including who is to report, the information to be reported, the manner of reporting, and the time and place of filing reports, will be mailed to those required to complete this survey.
(b) Entities required to report will be contacted individually by BEA. Entities not contacted by BEA have no reporting responsibilities.
This data collection has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act and assigned control number 0608-0009. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response. Additional information regarding this burden estimate may be viewed at
The Department of Commerce will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings, Co., Ltd. (Both-Well), a producer and/or exporter of forged steel fittings from the People's Republic of China (China), received countervailable subsidies during the period of review (POR) March 14, 2018, through December 31, 2018.
Applicable March 18, 2021.
Janae Martin or Katherine Johnson, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0238 or (202) 482-4929, respectively.
Commerce published the
On December 18, 2020, we received a case brief from Both-Well. On December 23, 2020, we received a rebuttal brief from Bonney Forge Corporation and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (collectively, the petitioners). For a complete description of the events that occurred since the
The product covered by the
All issues raised in the parties' briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed is attached to this notice at Appendix I. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at
Based on our analysis of the case and rebuttal briefs and the evidence on the record, we made no changes to the
Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy,
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated a final countervailable subsidy rate for Both-Well, the sole mandatory respondent in this review. For the companies subject to this review which were not selected for individual examination, we used the subsidy rate calculated for Both-Well. We find the countervailable subsidy rates for the producers/exporters under review to be as follows:
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review, for the above-listed companies at the applicable
In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amounts shown for Both-Well on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the most recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, effective upon publication of these final results, shall remain in effect until further notice.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
1. Apco Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
2. Cixi Baicheng Hardware Tools, Ltd.
3. Dalian Guangming Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
4. Eaton Hydraulics (Luzhou) Co., Ltd.
5. Eaton Hydraulics (Ningbo) Co., Ltd.
6. Feiting Hi-Tech Piping Zhejiang Co., Ltd
7. Hebei Haiyuan Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
8. Hebei Xinyue High Pressure Flange And Pipe Fitting Co., Ltd.
9. Jiangsu Forged Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
10. Jiangsu Haida Pipe Fittings Group Co., Ltd.
11. Jiangyin Tianning Metal Pipe Fitting Co., Ltd.
12. Jiangyin Yangzi Fitting Co., Ltd.
13. Jinan Mech Piping Technology Co., Ltd.
14. Jining Dingguan Precision Parts Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
15. Lianfa Stainless Steel Pipes & Valves (Qingyun) Co., Ltd.
16. Luzhou City Chengrun Mechanics Co., Ltd.
17. Ningbo HongTe Industrial Co., Ltd.
18. Ningbo Long Teng Metal Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
19. Ningbo Save Technology Co., Ltd.
20. Ningbo Zhongan Forging Co., Ltd.
21. Q.C. Witness International Co., Ltd.
22. Qingdao Bestflow Industrial Co., Ltd.
23. Shanghai Lon Au Stainless Steel Materials Co., Ltd.
24. Shanghai Longnai High Pressure Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
25. Shanghai Tongyang Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
26. Shanghai Yochoic Pipefittings Co., Ltd.
27. Witness International Co., Ltd.
28. Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited
29. Yancheng Boyue Tube Co., Ltd.
30. Yancheng Haohui Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
31. Yancheng Jiuwei Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
32. Yancheng Manda Pipe Industry Co., Ltd.
33. Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd.
34. Yingkou Liaohe Machinery & Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd.
35. Yuyao Wanlei Pipe Fitting Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
On March 3, 2021, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment sustaining the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) corrected final results of remand redetermination pursuant to court order. Commerce is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's final results in the third administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on multilayered wood flooring (MLWF) from the People's Republic of China (China), covering the period of review from December 1, 2013, through November 30, 2014, and that Commerce is amending its calculation of the rate applicable to separate rate respondents.
March 13, 2021.
Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3147.
Commerce individually examined Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited (Fine Furniture) and the collapsed entity Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd./Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (collectively, Dalian Penghong) as mandatory respondents in the third administrative review of the AD order on MLWF from China,
Fine Furniture and certain separate rate companies (collectively, plaintiffs) challenged Commerce's
Following the Federal Circuit's final opinion in
On September 23, 2020, Commerce issued its Remand Results, in which Commerce recalculated the rate applicable to the plaintiff separate rate respondents and assigned the remaining mandatory respondent Dalian Penghong's weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent to the respondents not selected for individual examination that were granted a separate rate in the
On March 3, 2021, the CIT sustained Commerce's Corrected Remand Results.
In its decision in
Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this case, Commerce is amending its
In the
On April 10, 2019, for Armstrong, and on August 11, 2020, for Dunhua City Jisen and Fine Furniture, pursuant to court order lifting the injunctions, Commerce issued liquidation instructions to CBP instructing CBP to liquidate entries for the December 1, 2013, through November 30, 2014 period of review without regard to duties given these companies' exclusion from the
Because there have been subsequent administrative reviews for separate rate respondents, the cash deposit rate for these companies will remain the rate established in the most recently completed administrative review.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
International Trade Administration, Commerce.
Notice of Information Collection; request for comment.
The Department of Commerce, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment preceding submission of the collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
To ensure consideration, comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before May 17, 2021.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments by mail to Richard Champley, Program Manager, ITA,
Requests for additional information or specific questions related to collection activities should be directed to Richard Champley, Program Manager, or Claudia Wolfe, Contracting Officer Representative (COR), ITA National Travel & Tourism Office (NTTO). Contact information:
The “Survey of International Air Travelers” (Survey) program, administered by the National Travel and Tourism Office (NTTO) of the International Trade Administration provides source data required to: (1) Estimate international travel and passenger fare exports, imports and the trade balance for the United States, (2) comply with the
The Survey program contains the core data that is collected, analyzed, and communicated by NTTO with other government agencies, associations and businesses that share the same objective of increasing U.S. international travel exports. The Survey assists NTTO in assessing the economic impact of international travel on state and local economies, providing visitation estimates, key market intelligence, and identifying traveler and trip characteristics. The U.S. Department of Commerce assists travel industry enterprises to increase international travel and passenger fare exports for the country as well as outbound travel on U.S. carriers. The Survey program provides the only available estimates of nonresident visitation to the states and cities within the United States, as well as U.S. resident travel abroad.
A revised survey instrument (questionnaire) (English version plus its translations into eleven foreign languages) was implemented in 2012. It reflects input from over 70 respondents, including: Travel Industry (airlines, travel associations, destinations, lodging); Consultants; Financial Firms; Educational Institutions; and other U.S. Government Agencies. A minor (`non-substantive') change was implemented in 2016 to better reflect the visitor's entry experience into the United States. This was requested by the United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board to measure compliance with U.S. National Goals.
The 2012 and 2016 revised Survey questionnaire reflect changes in various questions relating to: Trip purpose; payment methods; booking/information sources; additional package components, health care/vaccinations, travel insurance information, additional transportation utilized, assessment of the visitor's entry and overall experience; and intentions for further travel to the United States; and ethnicity/race. Several questions from the pre-existing 1996 questionnaire were eliminated to further streamline the survey.
Changes envisioned are: (1) Enhanced testing of the QR code/Mobile phone approach to leverage international airlines' growing capability of offering international Wi-Fi to its on-board passengers; (2) evaluation of a `short form' version of the paper questionnaire (23 of the existing 33 questions) to reduce burden and improve passenger response rates when time is limited in the boarding area due to covid-19 restrictions; (3) evaluation of a “land version” of the questionnaire should the U.S. Department of Commerce implement a surveying process at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. (Note: The government of Canada has discontinued surveying Canadian residents who visited the United States and the government of Mexico does not disclose details on Mexican visitors to the United States. The
The survey instrument/questionnaire (`Survey of International Air Travelers', a/k/a SIAT) continues to be in paper format and is self-administered by the passenger who volunteers to take the survey, either while in the departure gate area or on-board the flight. The flights are randomly selected, and this approach is described as `cluster sampling.' The majority (95%) of the passenger surveys are collected in U.S. airport departure gate areas. About 5% of all the passenger surveys are collected during flight (on-board) post departure (Canada has been included as part of the program in 2020). U.S. and foreign flag airlines that volunteer to participate in the Survey program enable the collection either in U.S. departure gate areas or on-board flights.
NTTO is planning to change the format to electronic or to an equally statistically valid process once compelling results have been attained. To date there have been five `e-Survey' tests: The first test was in partnership with Global Distribution Systems (GDS); the second and third tests were with major airlines in their respective boarding areas to leverage passenger's personal electronic devices (PED) and Wi-Fi capabilities in the airports and on-board certain flights; the fourth test used `tablet' devices to capture
The 2020 Pandemic (Corona Virus Disease 2019 or COVID-19) brought devastation to the United States and world economies. The travel and tourism industries were particularly hit hard, creating havoc with airline and airport-based data collection methods. International travel restrictions, cessation of international flight operations and airport barriers to entry for non-passenger personnel severely limited the U.S. Department of Commerce's ability to survey the number of passengers that were able to travel. (Note: travel to/from the United States was down −88% and −78%, respectively, in 2020).
Use of the QR code/Mobile phone approach was used selectively in situations when passenger respondents declined the paper survey due to perceived COVID-19 transmission concerns. In other situations, U.S. Department of Commerce field services administered a short form version of the questionnaire when time at the gate was limited. (Note: field service personnel were attired with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and followed strict mitigation protocols).
We are soliciting public comments to permit the U.S. Department of Commerce to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the U.S. Department of Commerce, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in its request to OMB to approve this Information Collection Request (ICR). Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Commerce.
Notice; correction.
On March 15, 2021, the Department of Commerce, published a 30-day public comment period notice in the
For additional information concerning this correction, contact Maureen O'Reilly, NIST, Management Analyst, at
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the initial publication notice date of March 15, 2021 on the following website
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; proposed issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA); request for comments.
NMFS has received a request from Halibut Point Marine Services, LLC (HPMS) for an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) that
Comments and information must be received no later than April 19, 2021.
Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Written comments should be submitted via email to
Dwayne Meadows, Ph.D., Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the original application, request for a new IHA, and supporting documents (including NMFS
The MMPA prohibits the “take” of marine mammals, with certain exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other “means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact” on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to here as “mitigation measures”). Monitoring and reporting of such takings are also required. The meaning of key terms such as “take,” “harassment,” and “negligible impact” can be found in section 3 of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362) and the agency's regulations at 50 CFR 216.103.
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the IHA request.
On July 30, 2019, NMFS received a request from HPMS for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to dock expansion activities. On April 8, 2020, NMFS issued an IHA to HPMS to take marine mammals incidental to the Old Sitka Dock North Dolphins Expansion Project in Sitka, Alaska (85 FR 21399, April 17, 2020), effective from October 1, 2020 through February 28, 2021. On February 3, 2021, NMFS received an application to complete the remaining work from the 2020 IHA. The application was deemed adequate and complete on February 21, 2021. As described in the application for the new IHA, the activities for which incidental take is requested were covered by the 2020 authorization but will not be completed prior to its expiration. HPMS requested the new IHA be effective from April 15, 2021 through April 14, 2022.
As described in the 2020 IHA, HPMS is adding two additional dolphin structures and strengthening two existing dolphin structures at their deep-water dock facility in Sitka Sound. Construction at the dock facility includes vibratory pile installation (and small impact if necessary) and vibratory removal of eight temporary, 30-inch template pile structures, vibratory and impact installation of ten 48-inch permanent piles comprising the dolphins, and down-the-hole drilling to install eight bedrock anchors for the permanent piles of the dolphins. The only remaining work for this IHA is constructing one new dolphin (
Vibratory pile removal and installation, impact pile installation, and drilling activity will introduce underwater sounds that may result in take, by Level A and Level B harassment, of seven species (Level A harassment is authorized for only two of the seven species) of marine mammals across approximately 55.9 square
A detailed description of the demolition and construction activities for which take is proposed here may be found in the notices of the proposed and final IHAs for the 2020 IHA. The location, and nature of the activities, including the types of equipment planned for use, are identical to those described in the previous notices.
The 2020 IHA was only valid from October 1 through February 28 because HPMS believed their Army Corps of Engineers permit would prohibit work from March 1 and June 15, and that cruise ship activity would prevent work from May 1 to October 1. Thus the Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion also prohibited work from March 1 to October 1. As it turned out, the Army Corps of Engineers permit did not prohibit work between March 1 and June 15 and large cruise ship activity did not take place in 2020, nor is it expected to occur in the summer of 2021. This new IHA will be effective year-round, and the applicant hopes to begin work close to April 15. In this part of Alaska, herring are common during spring and summer as discussed in the proposed 2020 IHA. Steller's sea lions in particular are more common in the project area during this time because they feed on herring. Because of this, the applicant has requested a larger daily rate of Level B harassment take of Steller's sea lions as discussed below.
The 2020 IHA considered an impulsive source level for the effects of down-the-hole drilling that was in line with our previous understanding of that activity. Since the 2020 IHA was analyzed, our understanding of down-the-hole drilling has evolved based on recent hydroacoustic monitoring. Our recommended impulsive source level for calculating Level A harassment isopleths has changed for holes of the size HPMS is creating. Below we update our analysis and the Level A harassment isopleths using our current understanding of down-the-hole drilling.
A description of the marine mammals in the area of the activities for which authorization of take is proposed here, including information on abundance, status, distribution, and hearing, may be found in the notices of the proposed and final IHAs for the 2020 authorization. NMFS has reviewed the monitoring data from the 2020 IHA, recent draft Stock Assessment Reports, information on relevant Unusual Mortality Events, and other scientific literature, and determined that neither this nor any other new information affects which species or stocks have the potential to be affected or the pertinent information in the Description of the Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities contained in the supporting documents for the 2020 IHA.
A description of the potential effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat for the activities for which take is proposed here may be found in the notices of the proposed and final IHAs for the 2020 authorization. NMFS has reviewed the monitoring data from the 2020 IHA, recent draft Stock Assessment Reports, information on relevant Unusual Mortality Events, and other scientific literature, and determined that, besides the revised understanding of down-the-hole drilling source levels and Steller's sea lion occurrence mentioned above and analyzed below, neither this nor any other new information affects our initial analysis of impacts on marine mammals and their habitat.
A detailed description of the methods and inputs used to estimate take for the specified activity are found in the Notice of the Final IHA for the 2020 IHA. Specifically, the source levels, and days of operation applicable to this authorization remain unchanged from the previously issued IHA, except for the change to the down-the-hole drilling source level and Level A harassment zones described below and in Table 1. Similarly, the stocks taken, methods of take, and types of take remain unchanged from the previously issued IHA. The only change to the marine mammal density/occurrence data is an increase in Steller's sea lions around the time of the herring run as discussed below. The only change to the number of proposed takes, which are indicated below in Table 2, is to account for the increased occurrence of Steller's sea lions and the work remaining to be completed.
Because the Level B source levels and harassment zone sizes for down-the-hole drilling did not change from the 2020 IHA we do not propose changes to the overall or Level B harassment take from down-the-hole drilling. However, in the 2020 IHA we used a source level of 166.2 dB (RMS) (decibels root mean square) to calculate the Level A harassment isopleths for down-the-hole drilling. More recent hydroacoustic data and analysis from down-the-hole drilling projects has led us to recommend the use of a source level of 164 dB SELss (sound exposure level single strike) from Denes
While the Level A harassment zones for down-the-hole drilling increase for this proposed IHA as discussed above, we do not propose to increase the Level A harassment takes for any species. HPMS is planning to implement activity-specific shutdown zones that are larger than in the 2020 IHA for down-the-hole drilling for all hearing groups except high-frequency cetaceans (Table 3). The revised down-the-hole drilling shutdown zones for low- and mid-frequency cetaceans and otariids are smaller than the largest Level A shutdown zones for those groups in the 2020 IHA, which did not necessitate any Level A takes in the 2020 IHA. Shutdown zones are expected to be successful in mitigating take for all of these species. Therefore, there is no need to revise or add Level A takes for any of these species in this IHA. The preliminary monitoring report shows no Level A or Level B harassment take of harbor porpoises through the completion of half of the project. Therefore, we believe that the previously authorized daily rate of Level A harassment takes is adequate to complete the project. The preliminary monitoring report shows 1 Level B harassment take and no Level A harassment takes of harbor seals (phocid) through the completion of half of the project. We have also proposed doubling the size of the shutdown zone for harbor seals. Therefore, we believe that the previously authorized daily rate of Level A harassment takes is adequate to complete the project.
As discussed above, the 2020 IHA was not effective during the spring/summer run of herring upon which Steller's sea lions are known to congregate near to feed on. To account for this potential for HPMS construction activity to affect more Steller sea lions we are proposing to increase the estimate that two groups of eight Steller sea lions may occur within the Level B harassment zone on each of the days of in-water construction used in the 2020 IHA to three groups of eight Steller sea lions may occur within the Level B harassment zone on each of the days of in-water construction for this proposed IHA. Thus we propose that 8 animals in a group × 3 groups each day × 9 days of in water work = 216 Level B harassment takes be authorized. As discussed in the 2020 IHA NMFS has determined that for management purposes the proportion of Western Distinct Population Segment (DPS) Steller sea lions in that area will be calculated based on Hastings
Based on the above discussion therefore, the only changes to the take for this proposed IHA (Table 2) are to increase the proposed daily rate of take by Level B harassment for increased occurrence of Steller's sea lions.
The proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures included as requirements in this authorization are identical to those included in the
• Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews and the marine mammal monitoring team prior to the start of all pile driving activity and when new personnel join the work, to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures;
• For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving (
• Drive all piles with a vibratory hammer until achieving a desired depth or refusal prior to using an impact hammer;
• For those marine mammals for which Level B harassment take has not been requested, in-water pile installation/removal will shut down immediately if such species are observed within or on a path towards the Level B harassment zone;
• If take reaches the authorized limit for an authorized species, pile installation will be shut down as these species approach the Level B harassment zone to avoid additional take;
• Implement all mitigation measures described in the biological opinion;
• Establish shutdown zones for all pile driving/removal and drilling activities. Shutdown zones will vary based on the activity type and marine mammal hearing group (see Table 3);
• Monitor the Level B harassment zones and Level A harassment zones;
• The placement of protected species observers (PSOs) during all pile driving and removal and drilling activities will ensure that the entire shutdown zone is visible during pile installation. Should environmental conditions deteriorate such that marine mammals within the entire shutdown zone will not be visible (
• Soft Start—For impact pile driving, contractors will be required to provide an initial set of three strikes from the hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 1 minute waiting period. This procedure will be conducted three times before impact pile driving begins. Soft start will be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact pile driving for a period of thirty minutes or longer;
• Pre-activity Monitoring—Prior to the start of daily in-water construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving/removal or drilling of 30 minutes or longer occurs, PSOs will observe the shutdown and monitoring zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone will be considered cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone for that 30-minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within the shutdown zone, a soft-start cannot proceed until the animal has left the zone or has not been observed for 15 minutes. If the Level B harassment zone has been observed for 30 minutes and no species for which take is not authorized are present within the zone, soft start procedures can commence and work can continue even if visibility becomes impaired within the Level B harassment monitoring zone. When a marine mammal for which Level B harassment take is authorized is present in the Level B harassment zone, activities may begin and Level B harassment take will be recorded. If the entire Level B harassment zone is not visible at the start of construction, pile driving or drilling activities can begin. If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of both the Level B harassment zone and shutdown zones will commence;
• Monitoring will be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30 minutes after pile driving/removal and drilling activities. In addition, observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven or removed or anchor shafts being drilled. Pile driving and drilling activities include the time to install, remove, or drill inside a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving or drilling equipment is no more than thirty minutes;
• A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal activities. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft report will constitute the final report. If comments are received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments; and
• In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the IHA-holder must immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR) (301-427-8401), NMFS and to Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator (907-586-7209) as soon as feasible.
The action in this IHA is identical to the action in the 2020 IHA except that work will now be allowed from April 15, 2021 through April 14, 2022, Steller's sea lion daily rate of take has increased, and the down-the-hole drilling Level A harassment source levels and zones have been updated to our current standards. As described in the notice of issuance of the 2020 final IHA (85 FR 21399, April 17, 2020) we found that HPMS' construction activities would have a negligible impact and that the taking would be small relative to population size. For this analysis of the new IHA we found that marine mammal abundance was still estimated to be the same or larger than was known for the 2020 IHA and that any changes did not affect our analysis or findings. Other marine mammal information and the potential effects were identical to the 2020 IHA. The estimated take was calculated identically to the 2020 IHA, except for Steller's sea lions. For Steller's sea lions the total take that occurred during the 2020 IHA plus the take authorized here are less than the take authorized in the 2020 IHA. Mitigation and monitoring are identical to the 2020 IHA except for the increase in Level A harassment and shutdown zones for the down-the-hole drilling for four hearing groups. These new zones are smaller that the existing zones for impact driving of the 48-inch piles, meaning there is no change to the largest Level A harassment or shutdown zones for the project as a whole, just potentially the number of days where larger Level A harassment and shutdown zones would need to be implemented.
NMFS has preliminarily concluded that there is no new information suggesting that our analysis or findings should change from those reached for the 2020 IHA. This includes consideration of the estimated
Based on the information and analysis contained here and in the referenced documents, NMFS has determined the following: (1) The required mitigation measures will effect the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat; (2) the proposed authorized takes will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks; (3) the proposed authorized takes represent small numbers of marine mammals relative to the affected stock abundances; (4) HPMS' activities will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on taking for subsistence purposes as no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals are implicated by this action, and; (5) appropriate monitoring and reporting requirements are included.
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531
Two marine mammal species, Mexico DPS humpback whales and Western DPS Steller sea lions, occur in the project area and are listed as threatened and endangered, respectively, under the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional OPR Division issued a Biological Opinion under section 7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to HPMS under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division. The Biological Opinion concluded that the action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of either species, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify western DPS Steller sea lion critical habitat. On February 23, 2021, the NMFS Alaska Regional Office Protected Resources Division notified us that they would issue a memo to the file, noting that the changes to allow work year round and to the down-the-hole drilling source levels do not alter the conclusions of the original Biological Opinion as long as the revised shutdown zones are implemented as additional mitigation and monitoring requirements, and no re-initiation of the consultation is necessary.
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to HPMS for conducting the Old Sitka Dock North Dolphins Expansion Project in Sitka, Alaska from April 15, 2021 through April 14, 2022, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found at
We request comment on our analyses (included in both this document and the referenced documents supporting the 2020 IHA), the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed construction activity at Old Sitka Dock. We also request comment on the potential for renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final decision on the request for MMPA authorization.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-year renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15 days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or nearly identical, or nearly identical, activities as described in the Specified Activities section of this notice is planned or (2) the activities as described in the Specified Activities section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the activities beyond that described in the
• A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior to the needed renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from expiration of the initial IHA);
• The request for renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the requested renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so minor (
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed or authorized;
• Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of public meeting.
On November 30, 2020, NMFS published a notice inviting qualified commercial shark permit holders to submit applications to participate in the 2021 Shark Research Fishery. The Shark Research Fishery allows for the collection of fishery-dependent data for future stock assessments and cooperative research with commercial fishermen to meet the shark research objectives of the Agency. Every year, the permit terms and permitted activities (
A conference call will be held on March 22, 2021.
A meeting will be conducted. See
Lauren Latchford at (301) 427-8503 or Delisse Ortiz at (240) 681-9037.
The Atlantic shark fisheries are managed under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) is implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635.
The final rule for Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (73 FR 35778, June 24, 2008, corrected at 73 FR 40658, July 15, 2008) established, among other things, a shark research fishery to maintain time-series data for stock assessments and to meet NMFS' research objectives. The Shark Research Fishery gathers important scientific data and allows selected commercial fishermen the opportunity to earn more revenue from selling the sharks caught, including sandbar sharks. Only the commercial shark fishermen selected to participate in the Shark Research Fishery are authorized to land/harvest sandbar sharks subject to the sandbar quota available each year. The 2021 base annual sandbar shark quota is 90.7 mt dressed weight (dw). The selected Shark Research Fishery participants also may fish using the research large coastal shark (§ 635.27(b)(1)(iii)(B)), small coastal shark (§ 635.27(b)(1)(i)(C) and (b)(1)(ii)(D)), and pelagic shark quotas (§ 635.27(b)(1)(iii)(D)) subject to the retention limits at § 635.24.
On November 30, 2020 (85 FR 76533), NMFS published a notice inviting qualified commercial shark directed and incidental permit holders to submit an application to participate in the 2021 Shark Research Fishery. NMFS received four applications and selected all four participants. In order to inform selected participants of this year's specific permit requirements and to ensure all terms and conditions of the permit are met, per the requirements of § 635.32(f)(4), NMFS is holding a mandatory permit holder meeting via conference call.
The conference call will be held on March 22, 2021, from 12:00 to 1:30 p.m. (EDT). Participants and interested parties should join via Webex:
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
Notice.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau), after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, will renew the Consumer Advisory Board (the committee or the CAB) effective on March 18, 2021. The CAB will “advise and consult with the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws” and “provide information on emerging practices in the consumer financial products or services industry, including regional trends, concerns, and other relevant information” as outlined in Section 1014(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
Manny Mañón, Staff Director, Advisory Board and Councils Section, Office of Stakeholder Management, Consumer Education and External Affairs Division, at 202-435-9830, or
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.), the Bureau hereby gives notice of renewal of the Consumer Advisory Board, effective immediately. The CAB is a continuing committee being renewed for the purposes of compliance with FACA and applicable statutes. This committee is being renewed concurrently with the publication of this notice by filing a charter with the Acting Director of the Bureau, the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, the Library of Congress, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the United States Senate, and the Committee on Financial Services of the United States House of Representatives. The charter will also be posted on the Bureau's website at
The CAB's purpose is outlined in Section 1014(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), which states that the committee shall “advise and consult with the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws” and “provide information on emerging practices in the consumer financial products or services industry, including regional trends, concerns, and other relevant information.”
To carry out the CAB's purpose, the scope of its activities shall include providing information, analysis, and recommendations to the Bureau. The CAB will generally serve as a vehicle for trends and themes in the consumer finance marketplace for the Bureau. Its objectives will include identifying and assessing the impact on consumers and other market participants of new, emerging, and changing products, practices, or services.
The duties of the CAB are solely advisory and shall extend only to its submission of advice and recommendations to the Bureau. The committee members will advise and consult with the Director and the Bureau on matters related to the committee's functions under the Dodd-Frank Act through committee and subcommittee meeting attendance and participation, fact and information exchange, submission of individual
In accordance with Section 1014(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act, “[i]-n appointing the members of the Consumer Advisory Board, the Director shall seek to assemble experts in consumer protection, financial services, community development, fair lending and civil rights, and consumer financial products or services and representatives of depository institutions that primarily serve underserved communities, and representatives of communities that have been significantly impacted by higher-priced mortgage loans, and seek representation of the interests of covered persons and consumers, without regard to party affiliation.”
The committee shall consist of no fewer than approximately ten members serving two-year terms, including at least six members appointed upon the recommendation of the regional Federal Reserve Bank Presidents on a rotating basis, and shall be chosen to ensure a fairly balanced membership. Equal opportunity practices in accordance with the Bureau's policies shall be followed in all appointments to the committee.
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
Notice.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau), after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, will renew the Community Bank Advisory Council (the committee or the CBAC) effective on March 18, 2021. The CBAC was established to consult with the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws as they pertain to community banks with total assets of $10 billion or less.
Manny Mañón, Staff Director, Advisory Board and Councils Section, Office of Stakeholder Management, Consumer Education and External Affairs Division, at 202-435-9830, or
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.), the Bureau hereby gives notice of renewal of the Community Bank Advisory Council. The CBAC is a discretionary committee being renewed for the purposes of compliance with FACA and applicable statutes. This committee is being renewed concurrently with the publication of this notice by filing a charter with the Acting Director of the Bureau, the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, the Library of Congress, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the United States Senate, and the Committee on Financial Services of the United States House of Representatives. The charter will also be posted on the Bureau's website at
The purpose of the CBAC is to advise the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws as they pertain to community banks with total assets of $10 billion or less. The Bureau's supervisory process provides an opportunity for learning and insight into the operations of financial institutions; having no corollary for small depository financial institutions, the Bureau created this committee to facilitate a similar opportunity for community banks to share insights regarding operational and technical considerations, community banking industry business practices, and the unique needs of their customers and communities. This group also provides timely and pertinent information on how Bureau policies impact community banks.
The duties of the CBAC are solely advisory and shall extend only to its submission of advice and recommendations to the Bureau relating to the activities and operations of community banks, which shall be non-binding on the Bureau. To ensure understanding of compliance and regulatory challenges faced by community banks, inclusion on the CBAC will be limited to community bank employees. No determination of fact or policy will be made by the committee, or its individual members, and the committee will have no formal decision-making role and no access to nonpublic CFPB information, to include confidential supervisory or other confidential information. The Bureau posts meeting minutes from the public advisory committee meetings on its website.
In appointing members to the committee, the Director shall seek to assemble members with diverse points of view, institution asset sizes, and geographical backgrounds. Only bank or thrift institution employees (
The CBAC shall consist of at least eight members serving two-year terms. All members appointed by the Director shall serve at the pleasure of the Director. Equal opportunity practices in accordance with the Bureau's policies shall be followed in all appointments to the committee.
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
Notice.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau), after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, will renew the Academic Research Council (the committee or the ARC) effective on March 18, 2021. The ARC will provide the Bureau with advice about its strategic research planning process and research agenda, including views on the research that the Bureau should conduct relating to consumer financial products or services, consumer behavior, cost-benefit analysis, or other topics to enable the agency to further its statutory purposes and objectives; and, provide
Manny Mañón, Staff Director, Advisory Board and Councils Section, Office of Stakeholder Management, Consumer Education and External Affairs Division, at 202-435-9830, or
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.), the Bureau hereby gives notice of renewal of the Academic Research Council. The ARC is a discretionary committee being renewed for the purposes of compliance with FACA. This committee is being renewed concurrently with the publication of this notice by filing a charter with the Acting Director of the Bureau, the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, the Library of Congress, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the United States Senate, and the Committee on Financial Services of the United States House of Representatives. The charter will also be posted on the Bureau's website at
The ARC will (1) provide the Bureau with advice about its strategic research planning process and research agenda, including views on the research that the Bureau should conduct relating to consumer financial products or services, consumer behavior, cost-benefit analysis, or other topics to enable the agency to further its statutory purposes and objectives; and, (2) provide the Office of Research with technical advice and feedback on research methodologies, data collection strategies, and methods of analysis, including methodologies and strategies for quantifying the costs and benefits of regulatory actions. The duties of the ARC are solely advisory and shall extend only to the submission of advice and recommendations to the Bureau. No determination of fact or policy will be made by the committee or its individual members, and the committee will have no formal decision-making role. The Bureau posts meeting minutes from the public advisory committee meetings on its website.
In appointing members to the committee, the Director shall seek to assemble members who are economic experts and academics with diverse points of view such as experienced economists with a strong research and publishing or practitioner background, and a record of involvement in research and public policy, including public or academic service. Additionally, members should be prominent experts who are recognized for their professional achievements and rigorous economic analysis including those specializing in household finance, finance, financial education, labor economics, industrial organization, public economics, and law and economics; and experts from related social sciences related to the Bureau's mission. In particular, the Director will seek to identify academics with strong methodological and technical expertise in structural or reduced form econometrics; modeling of consumer decision-making; survey and random controlled trial methods; cost-benefit analysis: Welfare economics and program evaluation; or marketing.
The ARC shall consist of at least seven members serving two-year terms. All members appointed by the Director shall serve at the pleasure of the Director. Equal opportunity practices in accordance with the Bureau's policies shall be followed in all appointments to the committee.
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
Notice.
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau), after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, will renew the Credit Union Advisory Council (the committee or the CUAC) effective on March 18, 2021. The CUAC was established to consult with the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws as they pertain to credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less.
Manny Mañón, Staff Director, Advisory Board and Councils Section, Office of Stakeholder Management, Consumer Education and External Affairs Division, at 202-435-9830, or
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.), the Bureau hereby gives notice of re-establishment of the Credit Union Advisory Council. The CUAC is a discretionary committee being renewed for the purposes of compliance with FACA and applicable statutes. This committee is being renewed concurrently with the publication of this notice by filing a charter with the Acting Director of the Bureau, the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services Administration, the Library of Congress, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the United States Senate, and the Committee on Financial Services of the United States House of Representatives. The charter will also be posted on the Bureau's website at
The purpose of the CUAC is to advise the Bureau in the exercise of its functions under the Federal consumer financial laws as they pertain to credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less. The Bureau's supervisory process provides an opportunity for learning and insight into the operations of financial institutions; having no corollary for small depository financial institutions, the Bureau created this committee to facilitate a similar opportunity for credit unions to share insights regarding operational and technical considerations, credit union business practices, and the unique needs of their customers and community. This group also provides timely and pertinent information about how Bureau policies impact the credit union industry.
The duties of the CUAC are solely advisory and shall extend only to its submission of advice and recommendations to the Bureau relating to the activities and operations of credit unions, which shall be non-binding on the Bureau. To ensure understanding of compliance and regulatory challenges faced by credit unions, inclusion on the CUAC will be limited to credit union employees. No determination of fact or policy will be made by the committee,
In appointing members to the committee, the Director shall seek to assemble members with diverse points of view, institution asset sizes, and geographical backgrounds. Only credit union employees (
The CUAC shall consist of at least eight members serving two-year terms. All members appointed by the Director shall serve at the pleasure of the Director. Equal opportunity practices in accordance with the Bureau's policies shall be followed in all appointments to the CUAC.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army, Department of Defense (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela James, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. James at
Office of the Surgeon General, United States Medical Command (MEDCOM), Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Army Public Health Center, Health Promotion and Wellness Directorate, Public Health Assessment Program, 5158 Blackhawk Road, Building E-1570, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5403, ATTN: Dr. Theresa Jackson Santo, 410-417-2844, or email
This needs assessment seeks to identify the type(s) of support provided by caregivers; determine the level of burden experience by providing caregiver support; identify the health status of the caregiver population; determine services needed to provide caregiver support; and assess the need for caregiver support training. Respondents are military and/or civilian caregivers who provide unpaid care and assistance for, or manage the care of, someone who is an active-duty military member, Army National Guard, Army Reserve, or veteran that has been diagnosed with a service connected illness, injury, or impairment for which they require outside support. Data will be collected initially through an electronic questionnaire, followed by individual interviews conducted either in-person or telephonically. “Outside support” may include help with tasks such as personal care, bathing, dressing, feeding, giving medicines or treatments, help with memory tasks for those identified with brain trauma, assistance in coping with symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), transportation to doctors' appointments, or arranging for services. Caregivers are not required to be domiciled with the patient receiving care to be eligible for this study. Care and assistance are considered unpaid if they provide care or assistance without the receipt (or expectation of) financial compensation. Compiling, analyzing, and understanding the responses of the various perspectives of patient care is necessary to set a baseline of care and identify core competencies, services, and support required for providers, patients and family members providing, accepting, or supporting injured Army members.
Defense Acquisition Regulations System; Department of Defense (DoD).
Notice.
DoD is publishing the updated annual list of product categories for which the Federal Prison Industries' share of the DoD market is greater than five percent.
April 1, 2021.
Greg Snyder, telephone 703-614-0719.
On November 19, 2009, a final rule was published in the
The Principal Director, Defense Pricing and Contracting (DPC), issued a memorandum dated March 2, 2021, that provided the current list of product categories for which FPI's share of the DoD market is greater than five percent based on fiscal year 2020 data from the Federal Procurement Data System. The product categories to be competed effective April 1, 2021, are the following:
The DPC memorandum with the current list of product categories for which FPI has a significant market share is posted at:
The statute, as implemented, also requires DoD to—
(1) Include FPI in the solicitation process for these items. A timely offer from FPI must be considered and award procedures must be followed in accordance with existing policy at Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.602(a)(4)(ii) through (v);
(2) Continue to conduct acquisitions, in accordance with FAR subpart 8.6, for items from product categories for which FPI does not have a significant market share. FAR 8.602 requires agencies to conduct market research and make a written comparability determination, at the discretion of the contracting officer. Competitive (or fair opportunity) procedures are appropriate if the FPI product is not comparable in terms of price, quality, or time of delivery; and
(3) Modify the published list if DoD subsequently determines that new data requires adding or omitting a product category from the list.
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
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 Standardization Program Office, 8725 John J Kingman Rd, Stop 5100, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6220, ATTN: Mr. Timothy Koczanski, or call 571-767-6870.
Responses per Respondent: 1.
Washington Headquarters Service (WHS), Facilities Services Directorate (FSD), Enterprise Performance and IT Management Directorate (EPITMD), Department of Defense (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela James, 571-372-7574, or
The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable.
The Agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:
• The collections are voluntary;
• The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per
• The collections are non-controversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;
• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;
• Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;
• Information gathered will be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency;
• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and
• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study.
Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information, but it does not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: The target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.
As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. James at
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
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 Counterintelligence and Security Agency, 27130 Telegraph Rd, Quantico, VA 22134-2253, ATTN: Mr. Christopher Pirch, or call 571-305-6241.
Contractor entities are responsible for completing contractual requirements. Based on guidance contained in their contracts, they must identify which personnel will require background investigations for clearances in order to complete those contracts. Therefore, in order to comply with the terms of the Fiscal Year 2001 Defense Authorization Bill as they pertain to quantifying background investigation requirements and to ensure sufficient funding for these background investigations for clearances, DCSA must solicit input from the contractor entities regarding the numbers of each type of investigation they require for contract performance requiring access to classified information. The survey data are used to project case and cost estimates, integral to planning and programming for NISP personnel security investigations across the Fiscal Year Defense Plan.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela James, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. James at
The Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service (DCPAS), Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
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 Civilian Personnel Advisory Service (DCPAS), 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 06E22, Alexandria, VA 22350, Kisha Wilkins, 571-372-2238.
Respondents are individuals participating in the DoD alternative workplace program (telework).
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to OUSD P&R/Accession Policy, Pentagon Room 3D1066, 1500 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1500, Dennis Drogo, 703-697-9268.
Respondents are high school districts (LEAs), high school administrators (
National Defense University, Department of Defense (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela James, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. James at
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Department of Defense (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela James, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. James at
Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Education (ED).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of a currently approved collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for proposed information collection requests should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Elise Cook, 202-401-3769.
The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), Department of Education (ED).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension without change of a currently approved collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 17, 2021.
To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Melissa Siry, (202) 260-0926.
The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
In an order issued on October 8, 2004, the Commission set forth a guideline for Other Federal Agencies (OFAs) to submit their costs related to Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act.
The Commission will hold a technical conference, via conference call, at the time identified below. The technical conference will address the accepted costs submitted by the OFAs. The purpose of the conference will be for OFAs and licensees to discuss costs reported in the forms and any other supporting documentation or analyses.
The technical conference will also be transcribed. Those interested in obtaining a copy of the transcript immediately for a fee should contact the Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc., at 202-347-3700, or 1-800-336-6646. Two weeks after the post-forum meeting, the transcript will be available for free on the Commission's e-library system. Anyone without access to the Commission's website or who has questions about the technical conference should contact Raven A. Rodriguez at (202) 502-6276 or via email at
FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an email to
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
a.
b. Project No.: 2701-061
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
j. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.
k.
The project consists of the following two developments:
The Prospect Development includes: (1) A 176-acre impoundment with a normal surface elevation of 1,161.5 feet;
The Trenton Development includes: (1) A 288-foot-long and 60-foot-high concrete and masonry dam having an overflow section with a crest elevation of 1,017.9 feet USGS, approximately 100 feet long surmounted by 6-foot hinged flashboards and a 10-foot by 15-foot sluice gate; (2) a concrete spillway approximately 160 feet long with a crest elevation of 1,016.2 feet USGS surmounted by a pneumatic flashboard system with a crest elevation of 1,023.9 feet USGS when fully inflated, discharging into a spillway channel excavated into rock around the east abutment of the dam; (3) a reservoir having a surface area of 9 acres and a gross storage capacity of 264 acre-feet at a normal pool elevation of 1,023.9 feet USGS; (4) six 5-foot-diameter sluice pipes through the dam and two concrete-sealed 5-foot-diameter pipes; (5) a reinforced-concrete intake structure having a lift gate and trashracks along the west bank of the reservoir; (6) a 14-foot-diameter conduit comprising: (a) a 1,275-foot-long concrete-lined tunnel section; (b) a 40-foot-long steel-lined tunnel section; and (c) a 2,075-foot-long steel pipe section; (7) a bifurcation; (8) a steel penstock comprising: (a) a short 12-foot-diameter section connecting to a surge tank and leading to a 125-foot-long, 12-foot-diameter section connecting to a manifold; and (b) three 138-foot-long, 7-foot-diameter sections serving generating Units 5, 6, and 7; (9) a 263-foot-long, 7-foot-diameter steel penstock to Units 1 through 4; (10) Units 1 through 4 in Powerhouse No. 1 retired in-place and Powerhouse No. 2 containing generating Unit 5 (7,400 kW), Unit 6 (7,650 kW), and Unit 7 (7,400 kW) for a total nameplate rating of 22,450-kW operated at a 255-foot head and a maximum flow of 1,450 cfs; (11) the 13.2-kV generator leads, the 15-kV switchgear, the 13.2/46-kV transformers, the 46-kV switchgear connecting to the main 46-kV bus, and the associated station services transformer banks and low voltage switchgear; and (12) appurtenant facilities.
The West Canada Creek Project operates off of outflows from the New York Power Authority's Hinckley-Jarvis Hydroelectric Project's (FERC No. 3211) reservoir (Hinckley reservoir) that discharges into the upper end of the Prospect Development's reservoir.
l. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
m. You may also register online at
n. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice of ready for environmental analysis.
On January 15, 2021, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) filed an application in Docket No. CP21-31-000 requesting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section 7(c) and 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act to construct, operate, and abandon certain natural gas pipeline facilities. The proposed project is known as the Perulack Compressor Units Replacement Project (Project), and would abandon by removal four existing compressor units and replace them with two new gas turbines to comply with air emission reduction requirements in Pennsylvania.
On February 2, 2021, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project. Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's environmental document for the Project.
This notice identifies Commission staff's intention to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for the Project and the planned schedule for the completion of the environmental review.
If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the Project's progress.
Texas Eastern proposes to abandon and remove four existing compressor units with a total certificated capacity of 34,800 horsepower (hp), install two new 18,100 hp units, and construct auxiliary appurtenant facilities at its existing Perulack Compressor Station in Juniata County, Pennsylvania. Texas Eastern would install related software controls that would limit each new compressor unit to 17,400 hp to be consistent with the current certificated capacity of the compressor station. Additionally, the Project would construct a new emergency generator, a new compressor building to house the two new compressor units, a new service entry building, two new electric buildings, a new stormwater management retention basin, and convert an existing compressor building into a storage warehouse.
On March 3, 2021, the Commission issued a
In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to keep track of formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This service provides automatic notification of filings made to subscribed dockets, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
Additional information about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the FERC website (
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
This notice announces the availability of EPA's proposed interim registration review decisions and opens a 60-day public comment period on the proposed interim decisions for the following pesticides: 4-Aminopyridine, 10, 10′-Oxybisphenoxarsine (OBPA), acetochlor, citric acid and salts, dimethenamid/dimethenamid-p, ethofumesate, fenazaquin, forchlorfenuron, monosodium methanearsonate (MSMA), novaluron, nucleopolyhedroviruses and granuloviruses (Insect Viruses), picloram, polixetonium chloride (Busan 77), and rotenone. In addition, the human health and ecological risk assessments for fenazaquin and MSMA and the preliminary work plan for citric acid and salts are also being published for public comment at this time.
Comments must be received on or before May 17, 2021.
Submit your comments, identified by the docket identification (ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the Table in Unit IV, by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at
Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room are closed to public visitors with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit
This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in the Table in Unit IV.
1.
2.
Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. As part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed proposed interim decisions for all pesticides listed in the Table in Unit IV. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.
EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability of EPA's proposed interim registration review decisions for the pesticides shown in Table 1 and opens a 60-day public comment period on the proposed interim registration review decisions. In addition, the human health and ecological risk assessments for fenazaquin and monosodium methanearsonate (MSMA) and the preliminary work plan for citric acid and salts are also being published for comment at this time.
The registration review docket for a pesticide includes earlier documents related to the registration review case. For example, the review opened with a Preliminary Work Plan, for public comment. A Final Work Plan was placed in the docket following public comment on the Preliminary Work Plan.
The documents in the dockets describe EPA's rationales for conducting additional risk assessments for the registration review of the pesticides included in the tables in Unit IV, as well as the Agency's subsequent risk findings and consideration of possible risk mitigation measures. These proposed interim registration review decisions are supported by the rationales included in those documents. Following public comment, the Agency will issue interim or final registration review decisions for the pesticides listed in Table 1 in Unit IV.
The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.58(a) provides for a minimum 60-day public comment period on all proposed interim registration review decisions. This comment period is intended to provide an opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to the proposed interim decision. All comments should be submitted using the methods in
The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the closing date and may provide a “Response to Comments Memorandum” in the docket. The interim registration review decision will explain the effect that any comments had on the interim decision and provide the Agency's response to significant comments.
Background on the registration review program is provided at:
7 U.S.C. 136
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of tentative approval.
Notice is hereby given that the Navajo Nation revised its approved
A request for a public hearing must be received or postmarked before April 19, 2021.
All documents relating to this determination are available online at
Adam Ramos, EPA Region 9, Drinking Water Section (WTR-4-1), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; via telephone at (415) 972-3450; or via email address at
If EPA Region 9 does not receive a timely and substantive request for a hearing and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on her own motion, the determination at issue in this notice, the EPA's approval shall become final and effective on April 19, 2021, and no further public notice will be issued.
Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300g-2 (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
This notice announces the availability of EPA's interim registration review decisions for the following chemicals: 1,4-DMN and 2,6-DIPN, acequinocyl, clopyralid, dithiopyr, etridiazole, fenpropimorph, fenpyroximate, flonicamid, flumetralin, formetanate HCl, hypochlorous acid, mandipropamid, MCPB,
This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the pesticide specific contact person listed under
Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. As part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed interim decisions for all pesticides listed in the Table in Unit IV. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.
EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in or on food.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability of EPA's interim registration review decisions and case closures for the pesticides shown in the following table. The interim registration review decisions are supported by rationales included in the docket established for each chemical.
The proposed interim registration review decisions for the chemicals in the table above were posted to the docket and the public was invited to submit any comments or new information. EPA addressed the comments or information received during the 60-day comment period for the proposed interim decisions in the discussion for each pesticide listed in the table. Comments from the 60-day comment period that were received may or may not have affected the Agency's interim decision. Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58(c), the registration review case docket for the chemicals listed in the Table will remain open until all actions required in the interim decision have been completed.
This document also announces the closure of the registration review case for
Background on the registration review program is provided at:
7 U.S.C. 136
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing the availability of the final product performance test guidelines for fire ants and invertebrate pests of pets. These test guidelines are part of a series of test guidelines established by the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) for use in testing pesticides and chemical substances. The test guidelines serve as a compendium of accepted scientific methodologies and protocols for testing that are intended to provide data to inform regulatory decisions. These test guidelines, which are identified as OCSPP Test Guideline 810.3100 and 810.3300, provide guidance for conducting a study to determine pesticide product performance against fire ants and invertebrate pests of pets, respectively, and are used by EPA, the public, and companies that submit data to EPA.
Marietta Echeverria, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address:
EPA is announcing the availability of the following final test guidelines: OCSPP Test Guideline 810.3100: Treatments for Imported Fire Ants and 810.3300: The Efficacy of Topically Applied Pet Products Against Certain Invertebrate Pests.
These test guidelines are part of a series of test guidelines established by OCSPP for use in testing pesticides and chemical substances to develop data for submission to the Agency under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408 (21 U.S.C. 346a), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136
The test guidelines are used by EPA, the public, and companies that are subject to data submission requirements under TSCA, FIFRA, and/or FFDCA. As guidance documents, the test guidelines are not binding on either EPA or any outside parties, and EPA may depart from the test guidelines where circumstances warrant and without prior notice. At places in this guidance, the Agency uses the word “should.” In this guidance, use of “should” with regard to an action means that the action is recommended rather than mandatory. The procedures contained in the test guidelines are recommended for generating the data that are the subject of the test guideline, but EPA recognizes that departures may be appropriate in specific situations. You may propose alternatives to the recommendations described in the test guidelines, and the Agency will assess them for appropriateness on a case-by-case basis.
This action is directed to the public in general. Although this action may be of particular interest to those persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of pesticides and chemical substances for submission to EPA under TSCA, FIFRA, and/or FFDCA, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.
1.
2.
EPA is announcing the availability of final test guidelines under Series 810.3100 entitled “Treatments for Imported Fire Ants” and identified as OCSPP Test Guideline 810.3100, and Series 810.3300 entitled “The Efficacy of Topically Applied Pet Products Against Certain Invertebrate Pests” and identified as OCSPP Test Guideline 810.3300. These revised guidelines replace the original versions published in 1998. The guidelines provide recommendations for the design and execution of studies to evaluate the performance of pesticide products intended for use against fire ants and invertebrate pests of pests, such as fleas, ticks, and mosquitoes, in connection with registration of pesticide products under the FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136,
EPA-registered pesticide products are an important part of pest management programs for pests of pets and premises. The Agency developed the product performance test guidelines to standardize the approaches to testing methods to ensure the quality and validity of the efficacy data for these types of products. The Agency attended entomology conferences, consulted with leading academics, and reviewed peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on topics related to the guideline to draft the original document. Further, EPA sought advice and recommendations from FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panels (SAPs) and the public. The SAP meetings, held on May 8-10, 2018, and June 11-14, 2019, were announced in the
As guidance, the test guidelines are not binding on the Agency or any outside parties, and the Agency may depart from it where circumstances warrant and without prior notice. While EPA has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in the guidance, the obligations of EPA and the regulated community are determined by statutes, regulations, or other legally binding documents. In the event of a conflict between the discussion in the guidance document and any statute, regulation, or other legally binding document, the guidance document will not be controlling.
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determined that the final test guideline documents are not significant regulatory actions under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). The final guidelines were not, therefore, submitted to OMB for review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
These test guidelines do not create paperwork burdens that require additional approval by OMB under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501
7 U.S.C. 136
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before May 17, 2021. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email to
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
The requirement to collect this information is contained in international agreements with the U.S. Coast Guard and private sector entities that issue MMSI's.
The information is used by private entities to maintain a database used to provide information about the vessel owner in distress using marine VHF radios with DSC capability. If the data were not collected, the U.S. Coast Guard would not have access to this information which would increase the time and effort needed to complete a search and rescue operation.
Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. and its continuation at the conclusion of the open meeting on March 25, 2021.
1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC. (This meeting will be a virtual meeting).
This meeting will be closed to the public.
Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109.
Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.
Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of extension in comment period.
As required by the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 (Patient Safety Act), the Secretary of HHS (the Secretary) is making this draft report on effective strategies for reducing medical errors and increasing patient safety available to the public for review and comment. Through this notice the comment period is extended. The subject matter content remains unchanged from the original notice which was published on December 16, 2020 (
Submit comments on or before April 5, 2021.
The draft report, Strategies to Improve Patient Safety: Draft Report to Congress for Public Comment and Review by the National Academy of Medicine, can be accessed electronically at the following HHS website:
Paula DiStabile, Patient Safety Organization Division, Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety, AHRQ; telephone (toll free): (866) 403-3697; telephone (local): (301) 427-1111; TTY (toll free): (866) 438-7231; TTY (local): (301) 427-1130; email:
The Secretary, in consultation with the Director of AHRQ, has prepared a draft report on effective strategies for reducing medical errors and increasing patient safety as required by the Patient Safety Act. The report includes measures determined appropriate by the Secretary to encourage the appropriate use of such strategies, including use in any federally funded programs. The draft report is now available for public comment and has been submitted to the National Academy of Medicine for review. The final report is required to be submitted to Congress no later than December 21, 2021. The specific provision describing these requirements can be found at 42 U.S.C. 299b-22(j).
The Patient Safety Act created a framework for the development of a voluntary patient safety event reporting system to advance patient safety and quality of care across the Nation. Without limiting patients' rights to their medical information, the law created Federal legal privilege and confidentiality protections for patient safety work product; that is, information exchanged between healthcare providers and organizations listed by the Secretary that specialize in patient safety and quality improvement, called patient safety organizations (PSOs). The law charged PSOs with analyzing and using this information to provide feedback and assistance to help providers minimize patient risk and improve the safety and quality of their care. More information about the Patient Safety Act, its implementing regulation, and PSOs can be found at
In addition to creating a protected legal environment where healthcare providers can share information and learning for improvement purposes beyond organizational and State boundaries, Congress also envisioned and created the potential for aggregating and analyzing patient safety data on a national scale. This part of the Patient Safety Act, the network of patient safety databases (NPSD), is a mechanism that can leverage data contributed by individual healthcare providers and PSOs across the United States into a valuable national resource for improving patient safety. Congress required the draft report that is the subject of this Notice to be made available for public comment and submitted to the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) no later than 18 months after the NPSD became operational. The NPSD became operational on June 21, 2019. More information about the NPSD
The draft report contains three chapters. It begins with an overview of the impetus for and objectives of the Patient Safety Act, its key provisions, and some milestones in its implementation. Chapter 2 reviews some of the principles and concepts underlying effective patient safety improvement, provides an overview of research and measurement in patient safety, and presents the strategies and practices for reducing medical errors and increasing patient safety reviewed in AHRQ's Making Healthcare Safer reports, published in 2001, 2013, and 2020. Together, these reports reviewed the existing evidence for the effectiveness of more than 100 patient safety strategies and practices used in hospitals, primary care practices, long-term care facilities, and other healthcare settings. They include cross-cutting strategies and topics such as patient and family engagement and teamwork training; safety topics specific to particular clinical interventions, such as medications and surgery; a variety of tools and processes, such as rapid response teams and antimicrobial stewardship; and practices that target prevention of specific harms, such as healthcare-associated infections and pressure injuries. Hyperlinks in the draft report lead to the full text of the evidence review and to later updates regarding the assessment of evidence for the effectiveness for each strategy and practice. The final chapter in the draft report begins with an overview of learning health systems and concepts underlying effective implementation of patient safety strategies. It provides examples of resources Federal agencies make available to encourage healthcare providers to use effective patient safety strategies and describes “Safer Together: A National Action Plan to Advance Patient Safety,” recently released by the National Steering Committee for Patient Safety that was convened by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. The draft report concludes by describing an approach that has a track record of success in encouraging providers to use effective practices to improve patient safety and outlines measures that could accelerate progress in improving patient safety and encouraging the use of effective patient safety improvement strategies.
The draft report is posted on the AHRQ PSO Program website at
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at:
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the
1.
There are other disclosure and notification requirements to Part D eligible individuals in § 423.56(c), (d), and (f); this PRA covers the requirement in subsection (e). Entities required to make this disclosure state whether their prescription drug coverage meets the actuarial requirements defined in § 423.56(a). Most entities that currently provide prescription drug benefits to any Medicare Part D eligible individual must disclose whether their prescription
Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) proposes to extend data collection under the existing overarching generic clearance for Financial Reports used for ACF Mandatory Grant Programs (OMB #0970-0510). There are no changes to the proposed types of information collection or uses of data.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Program offices use the information collected under this generic information collection to:
• Monitor program operations and prepare technical assistance and guidance, as needed.
• Assist in the computation of the grant awards issued to each program's grantees or annual incentive payments (Child Support Enforcement Program only).
• Determine that child support collections are being properly distributed (Child Support Enforcement Program only).
• Produce annual financial and statistical reports as may be required by Congress and respond to periodic detailed inquiries from Congress.
ACF may require an information collection approved under this generic clearance from funding recipients in order to obtain or retain benefits.
Following standard OMB requirements for a generic information collection, ACF will submit a generic information collection request for each individual data collection activity under this generic clearance. Each request will include the individual form(s) and instructions, and a short overview of the proposed purpose and use of the data collected. OMB should review requests within 10 days of submission.
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is proposing to collect data for a new wave of the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES).
Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by emailing
The studies are adding a fall 2021 data collection to address how families are faring during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data collection activities will include classroom and child sampling information collection, parent surveys, teacher child reports, and teacher surveys.
Sampling will begin with a freshening of the programs included in FACES fall 2019 and spring 2020 waves for a target of 180 programs that are nationally representative of all Head Start programs in the 2021-2022 program year. FACES fall 2021 data collection will take place in 60 of the 180 programs. AIAN FACES will return to the same 22 programs that participated in 2019 and 2020 data collection.
Sampling of teachers and children starts with sampling activities for 160 Head Start centers (120 for FACES 2019 and 40 for AIAN FACES 2019) in fall 2021. Study team members will request a list of all teachers and home visitors working with Head Start-funded children. Next, for each selected teacher or home visitor, we will request information for each child enrolled.
For the fall 2021 collection, FACES will survey the parents of 2,400 Head Start children in Regions I-X (FACES 2019) and 800 children in Region XI (AIAN FACES 2019) and ask their Head Start teachers to rate children's social and emotional skills. Parents of sampled children (2,400 for FACES and 800 for AIAN FACES) will complete surveys on the web or by telephone about their children and family in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Head Start teachers will rate each sampled child (approximately 10 children per classroom) using the Web or paper-and pencil forms. Teachers will also complete a survey, also using the web or paper-and-pencil forms, about their well-being and background. Additional data collection activities, to include the programs and respondents from fall 2021 plus the remaining 120 FACES programs, are planned for spring 2022 and will be included in a future
Section 640(a)(2)(D) and section 649 of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007.
Office of Child Support Enforcement, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services.
Request for public comment.
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) is requesting a 3-year extension of the forms: OCSE-34 “Child Support Enforcement Program Quarterly Collection Report,” and OCSE-396 “Child Support Enforcement Program Quarterly Financial Report.” These forms are currently approved under the ACF Generic Clearance for Financial Reports (OMB #0970-0510; expiration May 31, 2021), and ACF is proposing to reinstate the previous OMB number under which these forms had been approved (OMB #0970-0181). There are no changes requested to the forms, but the instructions have been updated for clarity and to update the current fee amounts.
Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by emailing
States use Form OCSE-396 to report quarterly expenditures made in the previous quarter and to estimate program expenditures to be made, and incentive payments to be earned, in the upcoming quarter. ACF provides federal funding to states for the Child Support Enforcement Program at the rate of 66 percent for all allowable and legitimate administrative costs of this program. States use Form OCSE-34 to report quarterly collections made under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act.
Tribes use OMB Form SF-425 to report quarterly expenditures made in the previous quarter. Form SF-425 is approved under OMB #4040-0014 and is not included as part of this comment request.
Sections 454(10), 455(b), 455(d), and 458(e) of the Social Security Act.
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces that the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality (ACIM) has scheduled a public meeting. Information about ACIM and the agenda for this meeting can be found on the ACIM website at
April 19, 2021, 12 p.m.-4 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) and April 20, 2021, 12 p.m.-4 p.m. ET.
This meeting will be held via webinar.
David S. de la Cruz, Ph.D., MPH, Designated Federal Official, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 301-443-0543; or
The ACIM is authorized by section 222 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 217a), as amended. The Committee is governed by provisions of Public Law 92-463, as amended, (5 U.S.C. App. 2), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of Advisory Committees.
The ACIM advises the Secretary of HHS on department activities and programs directed at reducing infant mortality and improving the health status of pregnant women and infants. The ACIM represents a public-private partnership at the highest level to provide guidance and focus attention on the policies and resources required to address the reduction of infant mortality and the improvement of the health status of pregnant women and infants. With a focus on life course, the ACIM addresses disparities in maternal health to improve maternal health outcomes, including preventing and reducing maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity. The ACIM provides advice on how best to coordinate myriad federal, state, local, and private programs and efforts that are designed to deal with the health and social problems impacting infant mortality and maternal health, including implementation of the Healthy Start program and maternal and infant health objectives from the National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives (
The agenda for the April 19-20, 2021, meeting is being finalized and may include the following topics: Immigrant maternal and child health issues; environmental contributions to infant mortality and maternal mortality; the role of doulas, and a discussion on priority topic areas for ACIM to address in a letter to HHS leadership. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. Refer to the ACIM website for any updated information concerning the meeting. Members of the public will have the opportunity to provide written or oral comments. Requests to submit a written statement or make oral comments to the ACIM should be sent to David S. de la Cruz, using the email address above at least 3 business days prior to the meeting. Public participants may submit written statements in advance of the scheduled meeting by emailing
Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance or another reasonable accommodation should notify David S. de la Cruz at the contact information listed above at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Alabama (FEMA-4573-DR), dated December 10, 2020, and related determinations.
The declaration was issued December 10, 2020.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated December 10, 2020, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
I have determined that the damage in the State of Alabama resulting from Hurricane Zeta during the period of October 28 to October 29, 2020, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of Alabama.
In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.
You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance under section 408 will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.
The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Allan Jarvis, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
The following areas of the State of Alabama have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:
Clarke, Dallas, Marengo, Mobile, Perry, Washington, and Wilcox Counties for Individual Assistance.
Autauga, Butler, Cherokee, Chilton, Choctaw, Clarke, Clay, Coosa, Dallas, Elmore, Hale, Marengo, Mobile, Monroe, Perry, Randolph, Talladega, Washington, and Wilcox Counties for Public Assistance.
All areas within the State of Alabama are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-4521-DR), dated April 4, 2020, and related determinations.
This change occurred on January 10, 2021.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Kathy Fields, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
This action terminates the appointment of Paul Taylor as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
Announcement of meetings; Correction.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a document in the
Robert Glenn, Office of Business, Industry, Infrastructure Integration, via email at
In the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (FEMA-4506-DR), dated March 30, 2020, and related determinations.
This change occurred on January 20, 2021.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Janice P. Barlow, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
This action terminates the appointment of MaryAnn Tierney as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-4576-DR), dated December 31, 2020, and related determinations.
The declaration was issued December 31, 2020.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated December 31, 2020, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Mississippi resulting from Hurricane Zeta during the period of October 28 to October 29, 2020, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.
You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance under section 408 will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.
The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Brett H. Howard, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
The following areas of the State of Mississippi have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:
George, Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Jackson, and Stone Counties for Individual Assistance.
George, Greene, Hancock, Harrison, Jackson, Perry, Stone, and Wayne Counties for Public Assistance.
All areas within the State of Mississippi are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Utah (FEMA-4548-DR), dated July 9, 2020, and related determinations.
This amendment was issued December 31, 2020.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Utah is hereby amended to include Public Assistance for the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of July 9, 2020.
Salt Lake County for Public Assistance.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas (FEMA-4504-DR), dated March 29, 2020, and related determinations.
This change occurred on January 10, 2021.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Kathy Fields, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
This action terminates the appointment of Paul Taylor as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of New Jersey (FEMA-4574-DR), dated December 11, 2020, and related determinations.
The declaration was issued December 11, 2020.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated December 11, 2020, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of New Jersey resulting from Tropical Storm Isaias on August 4, 2020, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.
You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Patrick Cornbill, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
The following areas of the State of New Jersey have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:
Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Monmouth, Morris, and Salem Counties for Public Assistance.
All areas within the State of New Jersey are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
30-Day notice.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until April 19, 2021.
Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal website at
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Telephone number (240) 721-3000 (This is not a toll-free number; comments are not accepted via telephone message.). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at
The information collection notice was previously published in the
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
30-Day notice.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until April 19, 2021.
Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal website at
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Telephone number (240) 721-3000 (This is not a toll-free number; comments are not accepted via telephone message.). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at
The information collection notice was previously published in the
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of intent.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Palm Springs-South Coast Field Office is proposing to amend the 1980 California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan, as amended, and prepare the associated environmental analysis for the Oberon Solar Project (Project). By this notice, the BLM is announcing the beginning of the scoping process to solicit public comments on issues and identify planning criteria.
This notice initiates the public scoping process for the CDCA Plan amendment with associated environmental analysis. Comments on issues may be submitted in writing until April 19, 2021. The date(s) and location(s) of any scoping meetings will be announced at least 15 days in advance through local news media, newspapers, and the BLM ePlanning website at:
To be included in the analysis, all comments must be received prior to the close of the 30-day scoping period. Additional opportunities for public participation will be available upon publication of the draft plan amendment environmental analysis document.
You may submit comments on issues and planning criteria by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Documents pertinent to this project may be examined during regular business hours upon request using email:
Brandon Anderson, Assistant District Manager, telephone (951) 697-5215; address Bureau of Land Management, 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos, Moreno Valley, CA 92553; email
The applicant, IP Land Holding, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Intersect Power, has requested a right-of-way (ROW) authorization to construct, operate, maintain, and decommission a 500-megawatt (MW) alternating current solar photovoltaic energy-generating facility along with the necessary ancillary facilities on public lands managed by the BLM. The project is proposed within a 4,700-acre area of public lands managed by the BLM just north and east of Desert Center, California. The Project is within a development focus area, as identified through the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) amendment to the CDCA Plan.
The DRECP contains Conservation and Management Actions (CMAs) that are intended to avoid and/or minimize impacts to numerous resources within the plan area. However, application of the relevant CMAs to the proposed project would preclude the ability to construct and operate the 500-MW project in an area identified as suitable for renewable energy development. As such, the proposed Project would require a plan amendment to allow solar development within the application area.
This notice informs the public that the BLM intends to prepare a draft CDCA Plan amendment and associated environmental analysis document for the Oberon Solar Project. It also announces the beginning of the scoping process for this effort and seeks public input on environmental issues and potential planning criteria relevant to the project and any potential plan amendments. The public-scoping process may guide the planning process and determine relevant issues that will influence the scope of the environmental analysis, including alternatives and mitigation measures.
Preliminary issues for the Project have been identified by the BLM, other Federal agencies, the State, local agencies, and other stakeholders. Issues include air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, special status wildlife and vegetation species, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, recreation, traffic, visual resources, and cumulative effects. Written comments may be submitted via one of the methods listed in the
If a plan amendment is necessary, the BLM will integrate the land use planning process with the NEPA process for the project. A preliminary list of the potential planning criteria that will be used to help guide and define the scope of the plan amendment includes:
1. Any plan amendments will be completed in compliance with FLPMA, NEPA, and all other relevant Federal laws, executive orders, and BLM polices.
2. Existing valid plan decisions will not change, and any new plan decisions will not conflict with existing plan decisions.
3. Any plan amendments will recognize valid existing rights.
With respect to the potential land use plan amendment, the BLM will evaluate identified issues to be addressed in the plan amendment, and will place them into one of three categories:
1. Issues to be resolved in the plan amendment.
2. Issues to be resolved through policy or administrative action.
3. Issues beyond the scope of this plan amendment.
The BLM will provide an explanation in the environmental analysis document as to why an issue was placed in category two or three. The public is also encouraged to help identify any
The BLM will utilize and coordinate the NEPA scoping process to help fulfill the public involvement process under the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 306108) as provided in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3). Information about historic and cultural resources within the area that may be potentially affected by the proposed action will assist the BLM in identifying and evaluating impacts to such resources. The BLM will consult with American Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order 13175 and other policies. Tribal concerns, including impacts on American Indian trust assets and potential impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration. Federal, State, and local agencies, along with tribes, and other stakeholders that may be interested in or affected by the proposed action that the BLM is evaluating, are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate in the development of the environmental analysis as a cooperating agency.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information (PII) in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your PII—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your PII from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to affirm an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 8) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) terminating the investigation as to respondent Walker Edison Co., LLC (“Walker Edison”) based on a consent order and to issue a consent order. The investigation is terminated.
Benjamin S. Richards, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-5453. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
The Commission instituted this investigation on November 9, 2020, based on a complaint, as supplemented, filed by Toppan Interamerica, Inc. of McDonough, Georgia (“Complainant”). 85 FR 71355 (Nov. 9, 2020). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain furniture products finished with decorative wood grain paper and components thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Copyright Registration No. VA 2-142-287. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists.
On January 21, 2021, Complainant and Walker Edison jointly moved to terminate the investigation as to Walker Edison based on the entry of a consent order. The joint motion included a consent order stipulation executed by Walker Edison and a proposed consent order. On January 27, 2021, the presiding ALJ issued the subject ID granting the motion. No petitions for review of the ID were received.
On February 19, 2021, the Commission determined to review the ID in light of apparent deficiencies in Walker Edison's consent order stipulation and in the proposed consent order submitted by the parties. In the notice of review, the Commission sought responses from the parties regarding whether either would object to correction of the deficiencies in the proposed consent order and whether Walker Edison would stipulate to the addition of a term to the proposed consent order. On February 22, 2021, both parties filed responses indicating that they did not object to correction of the deficiencies in the proposed consent order, and Walker Edison stipulated to the inclusion of the additional term in any consent order the Commission may issue.
In light of the parties' responses, the Commission has determined to affirm the ID and issue a consent order. Walker Edison is hereby terminated from the investigation, which is also terminated in its entirety.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on March 15, 2021.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on January 28, 2021, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Draft Top, LLC of Long Branch, New Jersey. Supplements to the complaint were filed on February 12 and 19 and March 1 and 2, 2021. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain apparatus and methods of opening containers by reason of infringement of a claim of U.S. Patent No. 10,519,016 (“the '016 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders.
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-2560.
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of claim 12 of the '016 patent; and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “apparatus(es) and products which are used for opening canned beverage containers by removing the top of the can;”
(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Draft Top, LLC, 179 Riddle Avenue, Long Branch, NJ 07740.
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:
(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), as amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the complainant of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 22) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) terminating the investigation with respect to the remaining respondents (Amazon, Apple, LG, Microsoft, Motorola, Samsung, and Sony) based on settlements. This investigation is terminated.
Ronald A. Traud, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3427. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
On March 20, 2020, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Neodron Ltd. of Dublin, Ireland (“Neodron”). 85 FR 16130 (Mar. 20, 2020). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain capacitive touch-controlled mobile devices, computers, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,821,425; 7,903,092; 8,749,251; and 9,411,472.
On November 24, 2020, this investigation was terminated as to ASUS. Order No. 19 (Nov. 12, 2020),
On January 27, 2021, Neodron and the remaining respondents (Amazon, Apple, LG, Microsoft, Motorola, Samsung, and Sony) filed a joint motion to terminate this investigation as to the remaining respondents based on settlements between Neodron and each remaining respondent. On February 8, 2021, OUII filed a statement in support of the motion.
On February 19, 2021, the ALJ issued Order No. 22, the subject ID, which granted Neodron's motion. The ID found that the motion complies with 19 CFR 210.21(b) and that no extraordinary circumstances prevent denying the motion. The ID also finds that there is no evidence indicating that terminating this investigation based on the various settlement agreements would be contrary to the public interest. No petitions for review of the ID were filed.
The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The investigation is hereby terminated in its entirety.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on March 15, 2021.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
On the basis of the record
The Commission instituted these investigations effective February 5, 2020, following receipt of petitions filed with the Commission and Commerce by Wincom Incorporated, Blue Ash, Ohio. The final phase of the investigations was scheduled by the Commission following notification of a preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of corrosion inhibitors from China were subsidized within the meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(b)) and sold at LTFV within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigations and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the
The Commission made these determinations pursuant to §§ 705(b) and 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on March 12, 2021. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication number 5169 (March 2021), entitled
By order of the Commission.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.
30-Day notice.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Department of Justice (DOJ) will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Form number: ATF Form 8620.57.
Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.
(4)
Primary: Individuals or households.
Other: None.
Abstract: The Prohibited Persons Questionnaire—ATF Form 8620.57 will be used to determine if a candidate for Federal or contractor employment at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), is prohibited from possessing or receiving firearms or explosives as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(g) or (n), and/or 18 U.S.C. 842(i).
(5)
(6)
If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
Notice of application.
Noramco Coventry, LLC. has applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to Supplemental Information listed below for further drug information.
Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before May 17, 2021. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before May 17, 2021.
Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.
In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on January 13, 2021, Noramco Coventry, LLC., 498 Washington Street, Coventry, Rhode Island 02816, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substances:
The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances for use as intermediates and converted to other controlled substances or for sale to its customers. In reference to drug codes 7360 (Marihuana), and 7370 (Tetrahydrocannabinols), the company plans to bulk manufacture these drugs as synthetics. No other
On March 12, 2021, the Department of Justice and the State of California on behalf of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Central District of California pertaining to environmental contamination at the Historic Stormwater Pathway South Operable Unit (“Southern Pathway OU,” also known as “OU6”) of the Montrose Chemical Corp. Superfund Site in Los Angeles County, California. This proposed Consent Decree was lodged in the case
The proposed Consent Decree, titled in full “Partial Consent Decree (Montrose Superfund Site—Historic Stormwater Pathway South Operable Unit)”, resolves certain claims or potential claims under Sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607, as well as certain potential state law claims, in connection with environmental contamination at the Southern Pathway OU. The proposed Consent Decree does not resolve the settling defendants' overall liability for environmental contamination at the Southern Pathway OU, but resolves their liability for the OU6 Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study and certain past and future response costs described below. The settling defendants are TFCF America, Inc.; Bayer CropScience Inc.; Montrose Chemical Corporation of California; and Stauffer Management Company LLC. The Consent Decree requires the settling defendants to perform the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study of contamination at the Southern Pathway OU, and to make a payment of $3,750,000.00 toward the United States' unreimbursed Southern Pathway OU past costs and certain sitewide “OU-00” costs, and a payment of $250,000.00 towards DTSC's Southern Pathway OU past costs. The proposed Consent Decree also requires the settling defendants to pay the United States' and DTSC's future response costs for overseeing the work the settling defendants will be performing pursuant to the Consent Decree.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website:
Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.
Please enclose a check or money order for $34.00 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) for the Consent Decree, payable to the United States Treasury. For a paper copy without the appendices and signature pages, the cost is $21.50.
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting this Wage and Hour Division (WHD)-sponsored information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before April 19, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) if the information will be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (4) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (5) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Anthony May by telephone at 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or by email at
The Davis-Bacon and related Acts (DBRA) require the application of Davis-Bacon labor standards to federal and federally assisted construction. The Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. 3145) requires the Secretary of Labor to prescribe reasonable regulations for contractors and subcontractors engaged in construction work subject to Davis-Bacon labor standards. While the federal contracting or assistance-administering agencies
For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number.
DOL seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) years. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal. The DOL notes that information collection requirements submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review.
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
Notice and request for comment.
The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), as part of a continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following extension of a currently approved collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Written comments should be received on or before May 17, 2021 to be assured consideration.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the information collection to Mackie Malaka, National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Suite 6060, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; Fax No. 703-519-8579; or email at
Address requests for additional information to Mackie Malaka at the address above or telephone 703-548-2704.
By Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of the Board, the National Credit Union Administration, on March 12, 2021.
Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Foundation for the Arts and the Humanities.
Submission for OMB Review, comment request.
The Institute of Museum and Library Services announces that the following information collection has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. This Notice proposes the clearance of the Evaluation of the Reopening Archives, Libraries, and Museums (REALM) Project research study, comprising archive and museums focus groups and libraries/archives/museums audience surveys. A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the individual listed below in the
Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the
OMB is particularly interested in comments that help the agency to:
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (
Written comments and recommendations for proposed information collection requests should be sent within 30 days of publication of this Notice to
Matthew Birnbaum, Ph.D., Supervisory Social Scientist, Office of Impact Assessment and Learning, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Suite 4000, Washington, DC 20024-2135. Dr. Birnbaum can be reached by telephone at 202-653-4760, or by email at
The Institute of Museum and Library Services is the primary source of federal support for the nation's libraries and museums. We advance, support, and empower America's museums, libraries, and related organizations through grant making, research, and policy development. Our vision is a nation where museums and libraries work together to work together to transform the lives of individuals and communities. To learn more, visit
The REALM Project is convening individuals from Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), OCLC Inc. (OCLC), Battelle, and several key actors in the libraries, archives, and museums (LAM) fields to bring their expertise and on-the-ground experience together to develop science-based information about how materials can be handled to mitigate COVID-19 exposure to staff and visitors of LAM institutions as COVID-19 restrictions begin lifting across the country. This project extends the guidance available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by providing information that is specifically relevant to LAM institutions. Given that LAM institutions work with physical materials that are often circulated among the public, LAM institutions have unique concerns about how they can optimize their operations while minimizing the potential for spreading the Coronavirus. This evaluation will be focused on understanding the extent to which the professionals from LAM institutions have found that the REALM Project's research test results and toolkit resources have met their needs. Data will be collected through a survey of organizations that have used the test results and toolkit developed by the REALM project and focus groups representing members of the museum and archive community who have not been engaged with the project. The evaluation is intended to provide information to OCLC and IMLS around the usefulness of the scientific information shared to the LAM community as well as the effectiveness of its distribution. The evaluation has
The National Science Board's Committee on Strategy (CS), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:
Wednesday, March 24, 2021.
This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314.
Closed.
The agenda of the teleconference is: Chair's opening remarks, Committee briefing on the results of OMB's passback for the FY 2022 budget.
Point of contact for this meeting is: Chris Blair,
Office of Personnel Management.
60-Day notice and request for comments.
Retirement Services, Office of Personnel Management (OPM) offers the general public and other federal agencies the opportunity to comment on an expiring information collection (ICR) with minor edits, Verification of Who is Getting Payments, RI 38-107 and RI 38-147. This ICR has been revised in the following manner: (1) The display of the OMB control number and (2) an updated edition date.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) and title, by the following method:
All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting the Retirement Services Publications Team, Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Room 3316-L, Washington, DC 20415, Attention: Cyrus S. Benson, or sent via electronic mail to
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as amended by the Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104-106), OPM is soliciting comments for this collection (OMB No. 3206-0197). The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
RI 38-107 is designed for use by the Retirement Inspection Branch when OPM, for any reason, must verify that the entitled person is indeed receiving the monies payable. RI 38-147 collects the same information and is used by other groups within Retirement Operations. Failure to collect this information would cause OPM to pay monies absent the assurance of a correct payee.
March 24, 2021, at 8:30 a.m.
Washington, DC.
Closed.
1. Strategic Issues.
2. Financial and Operational Matters.
3. Compensation and Personnel Matters.
4. Administrative Items.
Michael J. Elston, Secretary of the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone: (202) 268-4800.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend to amend Exchange Rule 200(d) requiring membership in another national securities exchange or association.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Exchange Rule 200(d) requiring membership in another national securities exchange or association. In sum, Exchange Rule 200(d) currently requires that Trading Permit
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest by expanding the number of registered brokers-dealers that would be eligible to become Trading Permit holders and trade on the Exchange, while maintaining high regulatory standards and a comprehensive regulatory regime with respect to such firms. Exchange Rule 200(d) was too restrictive by limiting membership in another registered national securities exchange to only registered options
The proposed rule change would also not unfairly discriminate between or among market participants because both current and prospective Trading Permit holders would be subject to the rule. All Trading Permit holders would be regulated in the same manner by the Exchange should they be a member of another registered national options or equities exchange.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is designed to enhance competition by expanding the number of registered brokers-dealers that would be eligible to become Trading Permit holders and trade on the Exchange by aligning Exchange Rule 200(d) with that of other national securities exchanges.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On January 8, 2021, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
Nasdaq proposes to modify IM-5900-7 regarding the package of complimentary services that it offers to eligible listed companies to: (i) Eliminate the tier that provides a higher level of services to Eligible New Listings
Currently, Nasdaq offers complimentary services under IM-5900-7 to a company listing on the Nasdaq Global or Global Select Market (i) in connection with an initial public offering in the United States, including American Depository Receipts (other than a company listed under IM-5101-2); (ii) upon emerging from bankruptcy; (iii) in connection with a spin-off or carve-out from another company; (iv) in connection with a direct listing as defined in IM-5315-1 (including the listing of American Depository Receipts); or (v) in conjunction with a business combination that satisfies the conditions in Nasdaq IM-5101-2(b) (“Eligible New Listing”).
The complimentary services that Nasdaq offers currently include a whistleblower hotline, investor relations website, disclosure services, audio webcasting, market analytic tools, and market advisory tools, which may include stock surveillance, global targeting, or an annual perception study.
Pursuant to the proposed rule change, Nasdaq proposes to eliminate the third tier of complimentary services offered to Eligible New Listings, such that all Eligible New Listings with market capitalization of $750 million or more would be offered the same complimentary services package.
Moreover, Nasdaq proposes to offer a Media Monitoring/Social Listening service and a Virtual Event service to Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches.
Nasdaq states that, given the increased attention from shareholders and other stakeholders to ESG disclosure, it proposes to offer Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches an ESG Core service.
Nasdaq also proposes to offer Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of $750 million or more an ESG Education and Sector Benchmarking service, whereby companies will receive access to ESG education, insight, and sector benchmarks to help them understand the ESG landscape.
Nasdaq states that Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization less than $750 million would be eligible to receive the ESG Core service, while Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of $750 million or more would be eligible to receive the ESG Core service and the ESG Education and Sector Benchmarking service.
Nasdaq states that it believes that offering the Media Monitoring/Social Listening service, the Virtual Event service, and the ESG services to public companies would help them fulfill their responsibilities as public companies and provide information important for communicating with their investors.
Nasdaq states that proposed IM-5900-7 would describe the complimentary service package applicable to eligible companies listing on or after the effective date of this proposed rule change.
Nasdaq states, with respect to the proposal to extend the complimentary services period for Eligible New Listings and for Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of less than $750 million, that it believes that it is appropriate to offer complimentary services for a longer period to those Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches that list after approval of this proposal than would be provided to those companies already listed on Nasdaq, because the purpose of the proposal is to attract future listings and this competitive purpose would not be served by providing the complimentary services for an extended period to companies that are already listed.
Finally, Nasdaq proposes to update the stated values of the services described in proposed IM-5900-7, IM-5900-8, and IM-5900-7A to reflect their current values.
The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, and finds that it is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.
The Commission believes that it is consistent with the Act for Nasdaq to eliminate the third tier of complimentary services offered to Eligible New Listings. Under the proposal, all Eligible New Listings with a market capitalization of $750 million or more would be offered the same complimentary services package for three years. Therefore, this change would have the effect of treating any company with a market capitalization at or above $750 million the same in terms of the complimentary services provided upon listing, whereas under the current rule Eligible New Listings with a market capitalization of $5 billion or more received more complimentary services than other Eligible New Listings. The Commission notes that the stated total retail value of the complimentary services packages offered to Eligible New Listings with a market capitalization of $5 billion or more would increase under the proposal when such companies are included in the revised market capitalization tier of $750 million or more, notwithstanding the elimination of the third tier.
The Commission believes that it is consistent with the Act for Nasdaq to extend the complimentary services period offered to all Eligible New Listings and for Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of less than $750 million from the current two years to three years. Under the proposal, the complimentary services period offered to Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of $750 million or more but less than $5 billion, or that have a market capitalization of $5 billion or more, will remain at four years. Therefore, under the proposal, Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches that have a market capitalization of less than $750 million would continue to have a complimentary services period of the same length. In addition, the proposal would reduce the discrepancy between the length of the complimentary services period offered to these companies and the length of the complimentary services period offered to Eligible Switches with a market capitalization of $750 million or more.
The Commission also believes that it is consistent with the Act for Nasdaq to offer Media Monitoring/Social Listening, Virtual Event, and ESG services to Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches. Nasdaq states that it believes that offering the Media Monitoring/Social Listening service and Virtual Event service to public companies promotes just and equitable principles of trade and protects investors and the public interest by helping Eligible New Listings and Eligible Switches fulfill their responsibilities as public companies through enhanced stakeholder engagement.
The Commission believes that Nasdaq is responding to competitive pressures in the market for listings in making this proposal. Nasdaq states in its proposal that it faces competition in the market
As noted in the Commission's previous order approving IM-5900-7, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act does not require that all issuers be treated the same; rather, the Act requires that the rules of an exchange not unfairly discriminate between issuers.
The Commission also believes that it is reasonable, and in fact required by Section 19(b) of the Act, that Nasdaq amend its rules to update the products and services it offers to Eligible New Listings, Eligible Switches, and other Acquisition Companies listed under IM-5101-2, including the time periods for which such products and services are offered and the commercial value of such products and services. This provides greater transparency to the Exchange's rules and the fees, and the value of free products and services, applicable to listed companies.
Finally, the Commission finds that it is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No. 1 in the
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On August 28, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 200(d) requiring membership in another national securities exchange or association.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Exchange Rule 200(d) requiring membership in another national securities exchange or association. In sum, Exchange Rule 200(d) currently requires that Trading Permit
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest by expanding the number of registered brokers-dealers that would be eligible to become Trading Permit holders and trade on the Exchange, while maintaining high regulatory standards and a comprehensive regulatory regime with respect to such firms. Exchange Rule 200(d) was too restrictive by limiting membership in another registered national securities exchange to only registered options exchanges and, therefore, unnecessarily precluded broker-dealers who were members of a registered equities exchange from becoming Trading Permit holders. As mentioned above, Exchange Rule 200(d) will continue to require Trading Permit holders to be FINRA members where the registered national securities exchange that they maintain membership is not designated by the Commission to examine members for compliance with financial responsibility rules pursuant to Rule 17d-1 of the Exchange Act. This will ensure that those Trading Permit holders that are not FINRA members maintain membership at a registered options or equities exchange that may be
The proposed rule change would also not unfairly discriminate between or among market participants because both current and prospective Trading Permit holders would be subject to the rule. All Trading Permit holders would be regulated in the same manner by the Exchange should they be a member of another registered national options or equities exchange.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is designed to enhance competition by expanding the number of registered brokers-dealers that would be eligible to become Trading Permit holders and trade on the Exchange by aligning Exchange Rule 200(d) with that of other national securities exchanges.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and Charges (“Fee Schedule”) to (1) replace current Tape C Tier 1 and Tape C Tier 2 pricing tiers with four new pricing tiers, Tape C Tiers 1-4; (2) adopt an alternative requirement to qualify for the Tier 1 pricing tier; (3) modify the requirement associated with the Step Up Tier pricing tier; and (4) eliminate the Cross-Asset Tier 1 pricing tier. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective March 1, 2021. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to (1) replace current Tape C Tier 1 and Tape C Tier 2 pricing tiers with four new pricing tiers, Tape C Tiers 1-4; (2) adopt an alternative requirement to qualify for the Tier 1 pricing tier; (3) modify the requirement associated with the Step Up Tier pricing tier; and (4) eliminate the Cross-Asset Tier 1 pricing tier.
The proposed changes respond to the current competitive environment where order flow providers have a choice of where to direct liquidity-providing orders by offering further incentives for ETP Holders
The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective March 1, 2021.
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.”
While Regulation NMS has enhanced competition, it has also fostered a “fragmented” market structure where trading in a single stock can occur across multiple trading centers. When multiple trading centers compete for order flow in the same stock, the Commission has recognized that “such competition can lead to the fragmentation of order flow in that stock.”
The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of products. While it is not possible to know a firm's reason for shifting order flow, the Exchange believes that one such reason is because of fee changes at any of the registered exchanges or non-exchange venues to which a firm routes order flow. With respect to non-marketable order flow that would provide liquidity on an Exchange against which market makers can quote, ETP Holders can choose from any one of the 16 currently operating registered exchanges to route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to orders that would provide liquidity on an exchange.
The proposed rule change is designed to be available to all ETP Holders on the Exchange and is intended to provide ETP Holders an opportunity to receive enhanced rebates by executing more of their orders in Tape C securities on the Exchange.
In this competitive environment, the Exchange has already established Tape C Tiers 1 and 2, which are designed to encourage ETP Holders that provide liquidity in Tape C securities to increase that order flow, which would benefit all ETP Holders by providing greater execution opportunities on the Exchange. The Exchange currently has multiple levels of credits for such orders that are based on the amount of volume that ETP Holders send to the Exchange.
In order to provide an incentive for ETP Holders to direct increased liquidity in Tape C securities, the Exchange proposes to replace the current Tape C pricing tiers with four new Tape C pricing tiers where the credits increase in the various tiers based on increased levels of volume directed to the Exchange.
Specifically, under proposed new Tape C Tier 4, ETP Holders that add liquidity to the Exchange in Tape C securities with a per share price of $1.00 or more and that have at least 0.15% Tape C Adding ADV as a percentage of US CADV,
The Exchange proposes to replace the current Tape C pricing tiers because the pricing tiers have been underutilized by ETP Holders. The Exchange believes the proposed new Tape C pricing tiers will encourage ETP Holders to increase their trading activity on the Exchange and direct more of their liquidity providing orders in Tape C securities to the Exchange.
Currently, under Tier 1, ETP Holders that provide liquidity an average daily share volume (ADV) per month of 0.70% or more of US CADV are provided a credit of $0.0031 per share for orders that provide liquidity in Tape A securities, a credit of $0.0023 per share for orders that provide liquidity in Tape B securities,
The Exchange proposes to modify the requirements to qualify for Tier 1 by adopting an alternative qualification basis for the Tier 1 fees and credits. As proposed, ETP Holders would qualify for the current fees and credits by providing liquidity an ADV of 0.70% or more of US CADV or at least 84 million shares of providing ADV. The Exchange does not propose any changes to the amount of fees charged and credits provided under Tier 1.
The Exchange believes that introducing alternative criteria for ETP Holders to qualify for Tier 1 will allow greater number of ETP Holders to potentially qualify for the tier, and will incentivize more ETP Holders to route their liquidity-providing order flow to the Exchange in order to qualify for the tier. This in turn would support the quality of price discovery on the Exchange and provide additional price improvement opportunities for incoming orders. The Exchange believes that by correlating the amount of the fee to the level of orders sent by an ETP Holder that add liquidity, the Exchange's fee structure would incentivize ETP Holders to submit more orders that add liquidity to the Exchange, thereby increasing the potential for price improvement to incoming marketable orders submitted to the Exchange.
The Exchange also proposes the non-substantive change of deleting “share” from “average daily share volume” in Tier 1 and adopting “ADV” as an abbreviation for average daily volume.
As noted above, the Exchange operates in a competitive environment, particularly as it relates to attracting non-marketable orders, which add liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange does not know how much order flow ETP Holders choose to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. Based on the profile of liquidity-adding firms generally, the Exchange believes that additional ETP Holders could qualify for the tiered rate under the new qualification criteria if they choose to direct order flow to, and increase quoting on, the Exchange. However, without having a view of ETP Holders' activity on other exchanges and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would result in any additional ETP Holders directing orders to the Exchange in order to qualify for the Tier 1 fees and credits.
Under the Step Up Tier, an ETP Holder is eligible to earn credits payable under the tier if the ETP Holder directly executes providing average daily volume (ADV) per month of 0.50% or more, but less than 0.70%, of US CADV and directly executes providing ADV that is an increase of no less than 0.10% of US CADV for that month over the ETP Holder's providing ADV in Q1 2018. ETP Holders that meet this requirement are eligible to earn the following credit:
• $0.0030 per share for orders that provide displayed liquidity in Tape A securities;
• $0.0023 per share for orders that provide displayed liquidity in Tape B securities; and
• $0.0031 per share for orders that provide displayed liquidity in Tape C securities.
The Exchange proposes to modify the volume requirement applicable to ETP Holders to qualify for the Step Up Tier by lowering the percentage threshold that an ETP Holder must meet, from 0.50% or more, but less than 0.70%, of US CADV to 0.45% or more, but less than 0.70%, of US CADV.
The Exchange believes the amended criteria would incentivize order flow providers to send a greater number of liquidity-providing orders to the Exchange to qualify for the pricing tier. As described above, ETP Holders with liquidity-providing orders have a choice of where to send those orders. The Exchange believes that, if it lowers the requirement to qualify for the credit, more ETP Holders will choose to route
As noted above, the Exchange operates in a competitive environment, particularly as relates to attracting non-marketable orders, which add liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange does not know how much order flow ETP Holders choose to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. Based on the profile of liquidity-adding firms generally, the Exchange believes that additional ETP Holders could qualify for the Step Up Tier credits under the revised qualification criteria if they choose to direct order flow to, and increase quoting on, the Exchange. However, without having a view of ETP Holders' activity on other exchanges and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would result in any additional ETP Holders directing orders to the Exchange in order to qualify for the Step Up Tier credits. The Exchange cannot predict with certainty how many ETP Holders would avail themselves of this opportunity but additional liquidity-providing orders would benefit all market participants because it would provide greater execution opportunities on the Exchange.
The Exchange is not proposing to amend any of the credits payable under the Step Up Tier.
The Exchange proposes to eliminate the Cross-Asset Tier 1 pricing tier.
Under Cross-Asset Tier 1, ETP Holders can receive a credit of $0.0031 per share in Tape A securities, a credit of $0.0030 per share and a fee of $0.0029 per share in Tape B securities, and a credit of $0.0032 per share in Tape C securities if such ETP Holder provides liquidity of 0.30% or more of the US CADV per month, and is affiliated with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm that provides an ADV of electronic posted Customer executions in all issues on NYSE Arca Options (excluding mini options) of at least 0.55% of total Customer equity and ETF option ADV as reported by The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”).
The Exchange proposes to eliminate the Cross-Asset Tier 1 pricing tier and remove it from the Fee Schedule because the pricing tier has been underutilized by ETP Holders. The Exchange has observed that historically, few ETP Holders have qualified for the fees and credits under the Cross-Asset Tier 1 pricing tier. The pricing tier has not served to meaningfully increase activity on the Exchange or improve the quality of the market. Since January 2020, no ETP Holder has qualified under the pricing tier.
With the proposed elimination of Cross-Asset Tier 1, the Exchange proposes to rename current Cross-Asset Tier 2 as Cross-Asset Tier and replace reference to Cross-Asset Tier 2 with Cross-Asset Tier in the Fee Schedule. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to delete the following rule text under current Cross-Asset Tier 2 pricing tier: “ETP Holders and Market Makers that qualify for this incremental Tape C credit shall not qualify for any fees and credits under Tape C Tier 1 and Tape C Tier 2.” With the proposed deletion of current Tape C Tier 1 and Tape C Tier 2, the above rule text would no longer be applicable. For the same reason, the Exchange also proposes to delete the following rule text under current Step Up Tier 4: “ETP Holders and Market Makers that qualify for Step Up Tier 4 shall not receive any additional incremental Tape C Tier credits for providing displayed liquidity.”
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented and competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.”
The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can shift order flow, or discontinue to [sic] reduce use of certain categories of products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable order [sic] which provide liquidity on an Exchange, ETP Holders can choose from any one of the 16 currently operating registered exchanges to route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces reasonably constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to orders that would provide displayed liquidity on an exchange. Stated otherwise, changes to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of an exchange to compete for order flow.
The Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate current Tape C Tier 1 and Tier 2 is reasonable because the Exchange is not required to maintain these tiers. Moreover, ETP Holders still have a number of other opportunities and a variety of ways to receive enhanced rebates for liquidity adding orders, including via the proposed new Tape C Tiers 1-4. The Exchange notes that the proposed change does not preclude any ETP Holder from achieving the proposed new Tape C Tiers 1-4 to qualify for the rebates or other available rebates under other pricing tiers (
The Exchange believes that the proposal to adopt Tape C Tiers 1-4 is reasonable because the tiers continue to provide an opportunity for ETP Holders to receive enhanced rebates based on the level of their trading activity in Tape C securities. The Exchange notes that relative volume-based incentives and discounts have been widely adopted by exchanges, including the Exchange, and are reasonable, equitable and non-discriminatory because they are open to all ETP Holders on an equal basis and provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to the value to an exchange's market quality and associated higher levels of market activity. Additionally, as noted above, the Exchange operates in highly competitive market. The Exchange is only one of 16 equity venues to which market participants may direct their order flow, and it represents a small percentage of the overall market. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume and/
Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed new pricing tiers continue to be a reasonable means to encourage ETP Holders to increase their liquidity on the Exchange. Increased liquidity benefits all investors by deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool, offering additional flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price discovery, promoting market transparency and improving investor protection.
The Exchange believes that the proposed new additional threshold for qualifying for Tier 1 is reasonable because it is designed to encourage increased trading activity on the Exchange. The Exchange believes it is reasonable to require ETP Holders to meet the applicable volume threshold to qualify for the Tier 1 credits. Further, the proposed change is reasonable as it would allow ETP Holders an additional method to qualify for the credits payable under the pricing tier if ETP Holders are unable to meet the existing requirement. The Exchange believes that the proposal represents a reasonable effort to promote price improvement and enhanced order execution opportunities for ETP Holders. All ETP Holders would benefit from the greater amounts of liquidity on the Exchange, which would represent a wider range of execution opportunities.
The Exchange further believes that removing an extraneous phrase from Tier 1 and adopting ADV as an abbreviation for “average daily volume” is reasonable as it would add clarity to the Fee Schedule.
The Exchange believes the proposed change to lower the volume requirement under the Step Up Tier is reasonable because it would allow ETP Holders to more easily meet the requirement of the pricing tier to receive per share credits payable under the pricing tier, thereby encouraging the submission of additional liquidity to a national securities exchange. Submission of additional liquidity to the Exchange would promote price discovery and transparency and enhance order execution opportunities for ETP Holders from the substantial amounts of liquidity present on the Exchange. All ETP Holders would benefit from the greater amounts of liquidity that will be present on the Exchange, which would provide greater execution opportunities.
The Exchange believes the proposed lower volume requirement is also reasonable as it would provide an additional incentive for ETP Holders to qualify for this established tier and direct their order flow to the Exchange and provide meaningful added levels of displayed liquidity, thereby contributing to the depth and market quality on the Exchange.
On the backdrop of the competitive environment in which the Exchange currently operates, the proposed rule change is a reasonable attempt to increase liquidity on the Exchange and improve the Exchange's market share relative to its competitors.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to eliminate the Cross-Asset Tier 1 is reasonable because the pricing tier has been underutilized and has not incentivized ETP Holders to bring liquidity and increase trading on the Exchange. Since January 2020, no ETP Holder has availed itself to the pricing tier that the Exchange is proposing to eliminate. The Exchange does not anticipate any ETP Holder in the near future to qualify for the pricing tier that is the subject of this proposed rule change. The Exchange believes it is reasonable to eliminate requirements and credits, and even an entire pricing tier when such incentives become underutilized. The Exchange believes eliminating underutilized incentive programs would also simplify the Fee Schedule. The Exchange further believes that removing reference to the pricing tier that the Exchange is proposing to eliminate would also add clarity to the Fee Schedule.
The Exchange believes its proposal equitably allocates its fees among its market participants.
The Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate the current Tape C Tier 1 and Tier 2 pricing tiers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it would equally impact to all ETP Holders (
The Exchange believes that the proposed adoption of Tape C Tiers 1-4 represents an equitable allocation of fees and is not unfairly discriminatory because all ETP Holders will be eligible for the proposed new tiers and the corresponding rebates will apply uniformly to all ETP Holders that reach the proposed tier criteria. That is, the proposed tiers are designed as an incentive to any and all ETP Holders interested in meeting the tier criteria to submit additional order flow to the Exchange and each will receive the proposed rebate if a tier criteria is met. While the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would definitively result in any particular ETP Holder qualifying for the proposed tiers, the Exchange anticipates a number of ETP Holders meeting, or being reasonably able to meet, the proposed criteria. However, without having a view of ETP Holders' activity on other markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would result in any ETP Holder qualifying for the proposed new pricing tiers. The Exchange also notes that the proposed change will not adversely impact any ETP Holder's pricing or their ability to qualify for other rebate tiers. Rather, should an ETP Holder not meet the proposed criteria, the ETP Holder will merely not receive the corresponding rebate.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to introduce alternative criteria for ETP Holders to qualify for Tier 1 equitably allocates its fees among its market participants. The Exchange believes the Tier 1 pricing tier is equitable because it is open to all similarly situated ETP Holders on an equal basis and provides a per share credit that is reasonably related to the value of an exchange's market quality associated with higher volumes. The Exchange believes it is equitable to require ETP Holders to meet the applicable volume thresholds to qualify for the Tier 1 credits. Further, the proposed change is also equitable as it would allow ETP Holders an additional method to qualify for the credits payable under the pricing tier if ETP Holders are unable to meet the current requirement. The Exchange believes the proposed change would continue to encourage ETP Holders to both submit additional liquidity to the Exchange and execute orders on the Exchange, thereby contributing to robust levels of liquidity, to the benefit of all market participants.
The Exchange believes that modifying Tier 1 would encourage the submission and removal of additional liquidity from the Exchange, thus enhancing order execution opportunities for ETP Holders from the substantial amounts of
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would also improve market quality for all market participants seeking to remove liquidity on the Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more liquidity to the Exchange, thereby improving market-wide quality. The Exchange believes that the proposal constitutes an equitable allocation of fees because all similarly situated ETP Holders and other market participants would be eligible for the same basic and tiered rates and would be eligible for the same fees and credits. Moreover, the proposed change is equitable because the revised criteria would apply equally to all similarly situated ETP Holders.
The Exchange believes that the proposed modification of the volume threshold to qualify for Step Up Tier represents an equitable allocation of fees. The Exchange is not proposing to adjust the amount of the Step Up Tier credits, which will remain at the current level for all ETP Holders. Rather, the proposal would continue to encourage ETP Holders to send orders that add liquidity to the Exchange, thereby contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which benefits all market participants. The Exchange believes that lowering the requirements would make it easier for liquidity providers to qualify for the Step Up Tier credits. The proposed change will thereby encourage the submission of additional liquidity to a national securities exchange, thus promoting price discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities for ETP Holders from the substantial amounts of liquidity present on the Exchange. All ETP Holders would benefit from the greater amounts of liquidity that will be present on the Exchange, which would provide greater execution opportunities.
Without having a view of ETP Holders' activity on other markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would result in any additional ETP Holders qualifying for this established tier. However, the Exchange believes the proposed lower volume requirement would provide an incentive for ETP Holders to continue to submit liquidity-providing order flow, which would promote price discovery and increase execution opportunities for all ETP Holders. While the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would definitively result in any particular ETP Holder qualifying for this established tier, the Exchange anticipates a number of ETP Holders meeting, or being reasonably able to meet, the proposed lower volume threshold. The proposed change will thereby encourage the submission of additional liquidity to a national securities exchange, thus promoting price discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities for ETP Holders from the substantial amounts of liquidity present on the Exchange, which would benefit all market participants on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would improve market quality for all market participants on the Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more liquidity to the Exchange thereby improving market-wide quality. ETP Holders that currently qualify for credits associated with Step Up pricing tiers on the Exchange will continue to receive credits when they provide liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that recalibrating the requirements for providing liquidity will continue to attract order flow and liquidity to the Exchange for the benefit of investors generally.
The Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate Cross-Asset Tier 1 is equitably allocated because it would apply to all ETP Holders (
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposal constitutes an equitable allocation of fees because all similarly situated ETP Holders and other market participants would be equally ineligible for the tier proposed for deletion. The Exchange believes that eliminating requirements and credits, and even entire pricing tiers from the Fee Schedule when such incentives become ineffective is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the requirements, and credits, and even entire pricing tiers would be eliminated in their entirety and would no longer be available to any ETP Holder.
The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, ETP Holders are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better value.
The Exchange believes that the proposed change to eliminate Tape C Tier 1 and Tier 2 and adopt Tape C Tiers 1-4 is not unfairly discriminatory because all ETP Holders will be impacted equally (
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to introduce alternative criteria for ETP Holders to qualify for Tier 1 is not unfairly discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, ETP Holders are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better value. Moreover, the proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category of market participant. The Exchange believes that the proposal does not permit unfair discrimination because the proposal would be applied to all similarly situated ETP Holders and all ETP Holders would be subject to the same modified Tier 1. Accordingly, no ETP Holder already operating on the Exchange would be disadvantaged by
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to lower the volume requirement under Step Up Tier 1 is not unfairly discriminatory. The proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category of market participant. The proposal does not permit unfair discrimination because the lower threshold would be applied to all similarly situated ETP Holders, who would all be eligible for the same credit on an equal basis. Accordingly, no ETP Holder already operating on the Exchange would be disadvantaged by this allocation of fees.
The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to adopt lower volume requirements for ETP Holders to qualify for the Step Up Tier pricing tier as the proposed change would apply on an equal basis to all ETP Holders. Further, the Exchange believes the proposed lower volume requirement would incentivize ETP Holders to execute more of their liquidity-providers orders on the Exchange to qualify for the credits payable under the Step Up Tier. The Exchange also believes that the proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory because it is reasonably related to the value of the Exchange's market quality associated with higher volume. The proposed lower volume requirement would apply equally to all ETP Holders as each would be required to meet the revised criteria.
The Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate Cross-Asset Tier 1 is not unfairly discriminatory. As noted above, tn [sic] the prevailing competitive environment, ETP Holders are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better value.
Moreover, the proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category of market participant. The Exchange believes that the proposal does not permit unfair discrimination because the proposal would be applied to all similarly situated ETP Holders (
The Exchange believes that eliminating requirements and credits, and even entire pricing tiers from the Fee Schedule when such incentives become ineffective is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the requirements, and credits, and even entire pricing tiers would be eliminated in their entirety and would no longer be available to any ETP Holder.
Finally, the submission of orders to the Exchange is optional for ETP Holders in that they could choose whether to submit orders to the Exchange and, if they do, the extent of its activity in this regard. The Exchange believes that it is subject to significant competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement regarding the burden on competition.
For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including those that currently offer similar order types and comparable transaction pricing, by encouraging additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's transaction credits at Equity 7, Section 118(a), as described further below.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's schedule of credits, at Equity 7, Section 118(a).
Presently, in Equity 7, Section 118(a), the Exchange offers several credits that are based, in part, upon members' activities in securities priced at or more than $1 relative to total “Consolidated Volume.”
The Exchange proposes to amend two of the credits it offers to members in displayed quotes or orders in securities in all three Tapes (other than Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail Orders) that add liquidity to the Exchange.
First, the Exchange proposes to amend a credit it presently offers of $0.00295 per share executed to a member that, through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs (i) adds shares of liquidity during the month representing at least 0.50% of Consolidated Volume during the month; (ii) adds at least 0.35% of Consolidated Volume during the month in securities in Tape C; and (iii) adds at least 0.15% of Consolidated Volume during the month in Designated Retail Orders
Second, the Exchange proposes to amend a credit it presently offers of $0.0030 per share executed to a member with shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represent more than 1.00% of Consolidated Volume during the month and shares of non-displayed liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represent more than 0.25% of Consolidated Volume. The Exchange proposes to decrease the threshold percentage of Consolidated Volume necessary to qualify for this credit from 1.00% to 0.95%. The Exchange proposes to lower this threshold to render it easier for members to qualify for the $0.0030 per share executed credit. The Exchange believes that more members may seek to attain this credit to the extent that it is more accessible to them. If more members increase their liquidity adding activity on the Exchange to attain this credit, then the quality of the market will improve, to the benefit of all participants.
In addition to the above, the Exchange proposes to establish a new credit for non-displayed orders (other than supplemental orders). Specifically, the Exchange proposes to provide a new credit for other non-displayed orders if a member, during the month: (i) Provides 0.30% or more of Consolidated Volume through non-displayed orders (other than midpoint orders); and (ii) increases providing liquidity through non-displayed orders (including midpoint orders) by 10% or more relative to the member's February 2021 average daily volume provided through non-displayed orders (including midpoint orders). The amount of this credit will be $0.00125 per share executed for securities in Tapes A and B and $0.00075 per share executed for securities in Tape C.
The Exchange intends for this new credit to reward members that provide significant volumes of non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange and to encourage such members to further grow the extent to which they provide non-displayed liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that any ensuing increase in non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange will improve the quality of the Nasdaq market. In particular, the Exchange intends to encourage members to increase the extent to which they provide non-displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B, as the Exchange believes that an increase in such liquidity is most needed and likely to be most beneficial to market quality.
The Exchange believes that its proposals are consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange's proposals are reasonable in several respects. As a threshold matter, the Exchange is subject to significant competitive forces in the market for equity securities transaction services that constrain its pricing determinations in that market. The fact that this market is competitive has long been recognized by the courts. In
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.”
Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market. For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of several equity venues to which market participants may direct their order flow. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume thresholds.
Within this environment, market participants can freely and often do shift their order flow among the Exchange
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to modify the qualification criteria for two of its transaction credits, at Equity 7, Section 118(a) because they will each encourage the addition of liquidity to the Exchange, first by making it easier for additional members to qualify for the $0.0030 credit, and second by challenging members that currently qualify for the $0.00295 per share executed credit to add additional liquidity to the Exchange to continue to qualify for it. If more members seek to qualify for a credit by adding liquidity to the Exchange, and if members increase their extent of their liquidity adding activity on the Exchange to continue to qualify for a credit, then the quality of the market will improve, and the Exchange will become more attractive to existing and prospective participants.
The Exchange also believes that its proposal is reasonable to establish a new add non-displayed credit with a growth component tied to the addition of non-displayed liquidity. The proposal will encourage members to increase the extent to which they provide non-displayed liquidity to the Exchange, and it will reward members that do so in significant volumes. The Exchange believes that any ensuing increase in non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange—and in particular, non-displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B—will improve the quality of the Nasdaq market, and it will cause the Exchange to become more attractive to existing and prospective participants. The Exchange notes that it selected February 2021 as the baseline for the growth requirements because it is the month immediately preceding the establishment of the new tier.
The Exchange notes that those market participants that are dissatisfied with the proposals are free to shift their order flow to competing venues that offer more generous pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Exchange believes its proposals will allocate its charges and credits fairly among its market participants.
The Exchange believes that is an equitable allocation to increase the eligibility requirements for the $0.00295 per share executed credit, and to lower the eligibility requirements for the $0.0030 per share executed credit, because both proposals will encourage members to add additional liquidity to the Exchange. To the extent that the Exchange succeeds in increasing liquidity on the Exchange, then the Exchange will experience improvements in its market quality, which again stands to benefit all market participants.
Additionally, the Exchange believes that it is equitable to establish a new add credit tier that is tied to the growth of non-displayed liquidity. The addition of this new proposed credit tier will encourage members to increase the extent to which they add non-displayed liquidity to the Exchange, and it will reward members that do so in significant volumes. The Exchange believes that any increase in non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange that follows from the introduction of this new credit—and in particular, non-displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B—will improve the quality of the Nasdaq market, and it will cause the Exchange to become more attractive to existing and prospective participants.
Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposals is free to shift their order flow to competing venues that provide more generous pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Exchange believes that its proposals ae not unfairly discriminatory. As an initial matter, the Exchange believes that nothing about its volume-based tiered pricing model is inherently unfair; instead, it is a rational pricing model that is well-established and ubiquitous in today's economy among firms in various industries—from co-branded credit cards to grocery stores to cellular telephone data plans—that use it to reward the loyalty of their best customers that provide high levels of business activity and incent other customers to increase the extent of their business activity. It is also a pricing model that the Exchange and its competitors have long employed with the assent of the Commission. It is fair because it incentivizes customer activity that increases liquidity, enhances price discovery, and improves the overall quality of the equity markets.
The Exchange believes that its proposals to amend the qualifying Consolidated Volume criteria for two of its transaction credits are not unfairly discriminatory because these credits are available to all members. Moreover, these proposals stand to improve the overall market quality of the Exchange, to the benefit of all market participants, by incentivizing members to increase the extent of their liquidity adding activity on the Exchange.
Likewise, the Exchange believes that its new proposed add credit with a growth component is not unfairly discriminatory because it is aimed at encouraging the growth of non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange, which if successful, stands to improve the quality of the Nasdaq market, to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange notes that its proposal to offer higher credits to members with orders in non-displayed securities in Tapes A and B than to those in Tape C is fair because the Exchange observes that its market has a greater need for, and its market quality would benefit most from, growth in non-displayed liquidity in securities in Tapes A and B. The Exchange has limited resources with which to apply to incentives, and it must allocate those limited resources in a manner that prioritizes areas of greatest need and potential effect.
Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposals is free to shift their order flow to competing venues that provide more generous pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange does not believe that its proposal will place any category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage.
As noted above, the proposed changes to the qualifying criteria for two of its transaction credits are intended to have market-improving effects, to the benefit of all members. Any member may elect to achieve the levels of liquidity required in order to qualify for the credits or fees.
Likewise, the proposed addition of a rebate tied to a member's activity in non-displayed liquidity will encourage growth in that activity, to the benefit of overall market quality. Any member may elect to engage in the levels of non-displayed liquidity adding activity that are required to qualify for this new credit.
The Exchange notes that its members are free to trade on other venues to the extent they believe that the proposed amended qualification criteria for these fees and credits are not attractive. As one can observe by looking at any market share chart, price competition
In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its credits and fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own credits and fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which credit or fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
The proposed amended credits are reflective of this competition because, even as one of the largest U.S. equities exchanges by volume, the Exchange has less than 20% market share, which in most markets could hardly be categorized as having enough market power to burden competition. Moreover, as noted above, price competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. This is in addition to free flow of order flow to and among off-exchange venues which comprises upwards of 50% of industry volume.
The Exchange's proposals are pro-competitive in that the Exchange intends for them to increase liquidity on the Exchange, thereby rendering the Exchange a more attractive and vibrant venue to market participants.
In sum, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
CFE Trading Privilege Holders (“TPHs”) may interface with CFE's trading system (“CFE System”) by utilizing either the Financial Information Exchange (“FIX”) protocol or the Binary Order Entry (“BOE”) protocol. CFE plans to enhance the BOE protocol by implementing a new version of the Binary Order Entry protocol (“BOE Version 3”). In reviewing its rules in connection with the preparation for the implementation of BOE Version 3, the Exchange identified proposed rule updates to further clarify how certain existing system attributes function which are not changing as a result of the implementation of BOE Version 3. The proposed rule change includes rule updates of this type that the Exchange is making in connection with CFE's implementation of BOE Version 3.
The scope of this filing is limited solely to the application of the rule amendments to security futures that may be traded on CFE. Although no security futures are currently listed for trading on CFE, CFE may list security futures for trading in the future.
CFE is making the rule amendments included in this proposed rule change in conjunction with other rule amendments being made by CFE in connection with its implementation of the BOE Version 3 that are not required to be submitted to the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Act
The rule amendments included as part of this proposed rule change are to apply to all products traded on CFE, including both non-security futures and any security futures that may be listed for trading on CFE. CFE is submitting these rule amendments to the Commission under Section 19(b)(7) of the Act
The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4 to the filing but is not attached to the publication of this notice.
In its filing with the Commission, CFE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. CFE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
CFE Rule 403 (Order Entry and Maintenance of Front-End Audit Trail Information) currently requires that single Orders, Bulk Messages, and Quotes submitted to the CFE System must contain specified information or they will be rejected or canceled back to the sender. CFE is proposing to amend Rule 403 to further clarify certain of its provisions.
Specifically, CFE is proposing to amend Rule 403 in the following ways:
Current Rule 403(b) enumerates the information that a single Order is required to contain. CFE is proposing to revise Rule 403(b) to clarify that the provisions of Rule 403(b) do not apply to Cancel Orders or to Cancel Replace/Modify Orders.
CFE is proposing to add new Rule 403(c) to address the information that a Cancel Order is required to contain. Specifically, proposed new Rule 403(c) provides that each Cancel Order must contain (i) the Client Order ID of the Order to be canceled; (ii) the Executing Firm ID (“EFID”); (iii) the Order Entry Operator ID; (iv) a manual Order indicator; and (v) any additional information as may be prescribed from time to time by the Exchange.
Similarly, CFE is proposing to add new Rule 403(d) to address the information that a Cancel Replace/Modify Order is required to contain. In particular, proposed new Rule 403(d) provides that each Cancel Replace/Modify Order must contain (i) a Client Order ID; (ii) the Client Order ID of the Order to be canceled; (iii) the EFID; (iv) the Order Entry Operator ID; (v) a manual Order indicator; (vi) the Order type; (vii) the price or premium; (viii) the quantity; and (ix) any additional information as may be prescribed from time to time by the Exchange.
To account for the proposed addition of paragraphs (c) and (d) to Rule 403, CFE proposes to change the paragraph lettering of current paragraphs (c) through (g) of Rule 403 to be paragraphs (e) through (i) of Rule 403.
Current Rule 403(e) (which is now proposed to be Rule 403(g)) provides that any single Order, Bulk Message, or Quote that does not contain required information in a form and manner prescribed by the Exchange will be rejected or canceled back to the sender by the CFE System. CFE proposes to revise this provision to make clear that any single Order, Bulk Message, or Quote that does not contain required or permitted information in a form and manner prescribed by the Exchange will be rejected or canceled back to the sender by the CFE System or the match capacity allocation through which the single Order, Bulk Message, or Quote was submitted will be disconnected by the CFE System.
For example, with the implementation of BOE Version 3, any Order submitted through a unit match capacity allocation must be for a CFE contract processed by the matching unit for that unit match capacity allocation. If the Order contains a contract identifier for a contract processed by a different matching unit, it would contain information that is not permitted to be included in an Order from that unit match capacity allocation. Accordingly, the Order would rejected or canceled back to the sender by the CFE System.
In other more limited situations, there may be invalid information included in an Order message submitted by a TPH which triggers the match capacity allocation through which the Order was submitted to be disconnected by the CFE System. For example, if a TPH submits an Order with a message type that is not a documented message type for CFE, the match capacity allocation through which the Order was submitted would be disconnected. Disconnecting a match capacity allocation in these situations allows the TPH to ascertain why an invalid message was submitted before the TPH reconnects the match capacity allocation and recommences sending Orders through the match capacity allocation.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
• To enable the Exchange to enforce compliance by its TPHs and persons associated with its TPHs with the provisions of the rules of the Exchange,
• to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
• to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
• to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities,
• to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
• and in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change serves to strengthen CFE's ability to carry out its responsibilities as a self-regulatory organization. First, the proposed rule change provides guidance to TPHs regarding the type of information that must be included within Cancel Orders and Cancel Replace/Modify Orders. Second, the proposed rule change contributes to enhancing the effectiveness of CFE's audit trail program by helping to assure that required information is included within Cancel Orders and Cancel Replace/Modify Orders and that single Orders, Bulk Messages, and Quotes without required information or with non-permitted information are not accepted by the CFE System. Third, the proposed rule change furthers CFE's ability to enforce compliance with CFE rules since the Exchange plans to utilize this audit trail information in connection with its surveillance of CFE's market and in connection with reviewing trading activity on CFE's market for rule compliance. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory in that the rule amendments included in the proposed rule change would apply equally to all TPHs.
CFE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on inter-market competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, in that the proposed rule change will enhance CFE's ability to carry out its responsibilities as a self-regulatory organization. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any undue burden on intra-market competition because the rule amendments included in the proposed rule change would apply equally to all TPHs.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The proposed rule change will become operative on March 15, 2021. At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
60-Day notice and request for comments.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) intends to request approval, from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the collection of information described below. The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requires federal agencies to publish a notice in the
Submit comments on or before May 17, 2021.
Send all comments to Cynthia Pitts, Director, Disaster Administrative Services, Office of Disaster Assistance, Small Business Administration.
Cynthia Pitts, Director, Disaster Administrative Services, Disaster Assistance,
Application for benefits (loan) used to determine eligibility and credit worthiness of small businesses or not for profit organization who seek Federal assistance in a declared disaster. Respondents are disaster victims seeking disaster assistance.
SBA is requesting comments on (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the agency to properly perform its functions; (b) whether the burden estimates are accurate; (c) whether there are ways to minimize the burden, including through the use of automated techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) whether there are ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information.
(1)
Susquehanna River Basin Commission.
Notice.
As part of its regular business meeting held on March 12, 2021, from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the Commission approved the applications of certain water resources projects, and took additional actions, as set forth in the Supplementary Information below.
March 12, 2021.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 N Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1788.
Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel and Secretary, telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312, fax: (717) 238-2436; email:
In addition to the actions taken on projects identified in the summary above and the listings below, the following items were also presented or acted upon at the business meeting: (1) Ratification/approval of contracts/grants; (2) requested approval to release a proposed rulemaking for public comment; (3) adopted a resolution designating the Executive Director as an authorized agent regarding a grant with PEMA; and (4) Regulatory Program projects.
1. Project Sponsor and Facility: Hastings Municipal Authority, Elder Township, Cambria County, Pa. Application for groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.260 mgd (30-day average) from Mine Spring Well 1.
2. Project Sponsor and Facility: Montgomery Water Authority, Clinton Township, Lycoming County, Pa. Application for renewal of groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.220 mgd (30-day average) from Well 3 (Docket No. 19910705).
3. Project Sponsor and Facility: Renovo Energy Center LLC, Renovo Borough, Clinton County, Pa. Modification to extend the project commencement date of the approval (Docket No. 20160608).
4. Project Sponsor and Facility: Village of Sidney, Town of Sidney, Delaware County, N.Y. Modification to extend the approval term of the groundwater withdrawal approval (Docket No. 19860201) to provide time for development of a replacement source for existing Well 2-88.
5. Project Sponsor: SUEZ Water Pennsylvania Inc. Project Facility: Dallas Operation, Dallas Township, Luzerne County, Pa. Application for renewal of groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.168 mgd (30-day average) from the Schooley Well (Docket No. 19881103).
6. Project Sponsor and Facility: Upstate Niagara Cooperative, Inc., Town of Campbell, Steuben County, N.Y. Applications for groundwater withdrawals (30-day averages) of up to 0.510 mgd from Well 1 and renewal of up to 1.100 mgd from Well 4 (Docket No. 19950904).
7. Project Sponsor and Facility: Empire Kosher Poultry, Inc., Walker Township, Juniata County, Pa. Conforming the grandfathered amount with the forthcoming determination for consumptive use of up to 0.049 mgd (30-day average) (Docket No. 20030809).
8. Project Sponsor and Facility: Beech Resources, LLC (Lycoming Creek), Lycoming Township, Lycoming County, Pa. Application for surface water withdrawal of up to 1.500 mgd (peak day).
9. Project Sponsor and Facility: Geneva Farm Golf Course, Inc., Dublin District, Harford County, Md. Application for renewal of consumptive use of up to 0.099 mgd (30-day average) (Docket No. 19910104).
10. Project Sponsor and Facility: Greenfield Township Municipal Authority, Greenfield Township, Blair County, Pa. Application for groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.499 mgd (30-day average) from Well PW-4.
11. Project Sponsor: Weaverland Valley Authority. Project Facility: Blue Ball Water System, East Earl Township, Lancaster County, Pa. Application for groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.144 mgd (30-day average) from Well 4.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission.
Notice.
This notice lists Grandfathering Registration for projects by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission during the period set forth in
February 1-28, 2021.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1788.
Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel and Secretary to the Commission, telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312; fax: (717) 238-2436; email:
This notice lists GF Registration for projects, described below, pursuant to 18 CFR 806, Subpart E for the time period specified above:
1. Blossburg Municipal Authority—Public Water Supply System, GF Certificate No. GF-202102155, Bloss Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Bellman Run; Issue Date: February 23, 2021.
2. Elizabethville Area Authority—Public Water Supply System, GF Certificate No. GF-202102156, Washington Township, Dauphin County, Pa.; Lentz and Loyalton Wells; Issue Date: February 23, 2021.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission.
Notice.
This notice lists the projects approved by rule by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission during the period set forth in
January 1-31, 2021
Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1788.
Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel and Secretary to the Commission, telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312; fax: (717) 238-2436; email:
This notice lists the projects, described below, receiving approval for the consumptive use of water pursuant to the Commission's approval by rule process set forth in 18 CFR 806.22 (e) and 18 CFR 806.22 (f) for the time period specified above:
1. Frontier Natural Resources, Inc.; Pad ID: Winner 6 Well Pad; ABR-201110026.R1; East Keating Township, Clinton County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 8, 2021.
2. Pin Oak Energy Partners, LLC; Pad ID: Wolfinger Pad A—Beechwood; ABR-202101002; St. Mary's City, Elk County; and Shippen Township, Cameron County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 8, 2021.
3. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: MerrittM P1; ABR-202101001; Gibson Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
4. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Gamble Pad I; ABR-201511002.R1; Gamble Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
5. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Seymour 599; ABR-201009063.R2; Sullivan Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
6. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Martin 710; ABR-201009089.R2; Delmar Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
7. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: SSHC Pad A; ABR-201009055.R2; Lawrence Township, Clearfield County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
8. Rockdale Marcellus, LLC; Pad ID: Ingalls 710; ABR-201009080.R2; Liberty Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9900 mgd; Approval Date: January 18, 2021.
9. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: DerianchoF P1; ABR-201011055.R2; Bridgewater Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: Janauary18, 2021.
10. XTO Energy, Inc.; Pad ID: PA TRACT 8546H; ABR-201010070.R2; Chapman Township, Clinton County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
11. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Thomas 503; ABR-201007050.R2; Sullivan Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
12. Chief Oil & Gas, LLC; Pad ID: Dacheux Drilling Pad #1; ABR-201101014.R2; Cherry Township, Sullivan County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
13. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Smith 589; ABR-201009088.R2; Richmond Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
14. ARD Operating, LLC; Pad ID: Harry W Stryker Pad A; ABR-201011044.R2; Cogan House Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
15. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: Ely P2; ABR-20080722.R2; Dimock Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
16. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: WHEATON (05 223) W; ABR-201011072.R2; Windham Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
17. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: PECK HILL FARM (05 180); ABR-201011056.R2; Windham Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
18. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Shaw Trust 500; ABR-201011070.R2; Sullivan Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
19. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Signor 583; ABR-201011059.R2; Covington Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
20. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Torpy & Van Order Inc. 574; ABR-201011043.R2; Covington Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
21. Range Resources—Appalachia, LLC; Pad ID: Red Bend Hunting & Fishing Club Unit #3H-#5H Drilling Pad; ABR-201011067.R2; Cogan House Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 22, 2021.
22. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Brewer 258; ABR-201012013.R2; Jackson Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 24, 2021.
23. Range Resources—Appalachia, LLC; Pad ID: Fuller, Eugene Unit #1H-#3H Drilling Pad; ABR-201012004.R2; Mifflin Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 24, 2021.
24. VEC Energy, LLC; Pad ID: Sylvester 1H; ABR-20100155.R1; Brookfield Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 28, 2021.
25. VEC Energy, LLC; Pad ID: NorthFork 1H; ABR-20100158.R1; Brookfield Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 28, 2021.
26. VEC Energy, LLC; Pad ID: Austinburg 1H; ABR-20100313.R1; Brookfield Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 28, 2021.
27. Pennsylvania General Energy Company, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Reed Run Norwich Pad D; ABR-201012028.R2; Norwich Township, McKean County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 3.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
28. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Kinnarney; ABR-201012030.R2; Albany Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
29. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Norconk; ABR-201012023.R2; Wilmot Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
30. XPR Resources, LLC; Pad ID: Resource Recovery Well Pad 3; ABR-201010060.R2; Snow Shoe Township, Centre County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
31. XPR Resources, LLC; Pad ID: Resource Recovery Well Pad 2; ABR-201011012.R2; Snow Shoe Township, Centre County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
32. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: SLOVAK (05 202) M; ABR-201012031.R2; Windham Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
33. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Vanvliet 614; ABR-201012044.R2; Delmar Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
34. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Swingle 591; ABR-201012018.R2; Delmar Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
35. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: AbbottD P2; ABR-201512003.R1;
36. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: HowellG P1; ABR-201512004.R1; Auburn Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
37. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation; Pad ID: Jeffers Farm P5; ABR-201512005.R1; Gibson Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 29, 2021.
38. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Harsell 883; ABR-201007066.R2; Nelson Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
39. Range Resources—Appalachia, LLC; Pad ID: Lone Walnut Hunting Club; ABR-201007031.R2; Cummings Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
40. Range Resources—Appalachia, LLC; Pad ID: Winner Unit #2H-#5H Drilling Pad; ABR-201012050.R2; Gallagher Township, Clinton County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
41. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Aukema; ABR-201101013.R2; Meshoppen Township, Wyoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
42. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Beech Flats; ABR-201101012.R2; West Branch Township, Potter County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
43. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Bo; ABR-201101016.R2; Tuscarora Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
44. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Meng; ABR-201101005.R2; Albany Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
45. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Rocks; ABR-201101003.R2; Overton Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
46. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Struble; ABR-201101017.R2; Litchfield Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
47. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Wasyl; ABR-201101002.R2; Ulster Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: January 31, 2021.
Pub. L. 91-575, 84 Stat. 1509
Susquehanna River Basin Commission.
Notice.
This notice lists the projects approved by rule by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission during the period set forth in
February 1-28, 2021.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 4423 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110-1788.
Jason E. Oyler, General Counsel and Secretary to the Commission, telephone: (717) 238-0423, ext. 1312; fax: (717) 238-2436; email:
This notice lists the projects, described below, receiving approval for the consumptive use of water pursuant to the Commission's approval by rule process set forth in 18 CFR 806.22(e) and 18 CFR 806.22(f) for the time period specified above:
1. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: RU-75-SGL A PAD; ABR-202102001; Great Bend and New Milford Townships, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
2. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Gee 848W; ABR-201508005.R1; Middlebury Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
3. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: DCNR 100 Pad C; ABR-201102007.R2; Cogan House Township, Lycoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
4. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: VRGC; ABR-201101022.R2; Wilmot Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
5. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: MILLER (05 056) F; ABR-201010008.R2; Warren Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
6. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Walker; ABR-201101030.R2; Wilmot Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
7. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Cuthbertson; ABR-201102001.R2; Wilmot Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
8. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Jokah; ABR-201102005.R2; Windham Township, Wyoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
9. Rockdale Marcellus, LLC; Pad ID: Groff 720; ABR-201012017.R2; Canton Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9900 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
10. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: UHOUSE (05 081) D; ABR-201102008.R2; Orwell Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
11. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: TI-22 Fall Creek A—Pad; ABR-201511008.R1; Liberty Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval Date: February 18, 2021.
12. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: WY 09 OTTEN PAD; ABR-201512002.R1; Forkston Township, Wyoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval Date: February 22, 2021.
13. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: PU-AA Gerfin Price Pad; ABR-201102022.R2; Lenox Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9990 mgd; Approval Date: February 22, 2021.
14. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: RU-74 TRETTER PAD; ABR-201601005.R2; Great Bend Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9900 mgd; Approval Date: February 22, 2021.
15. S.T.L. Resources, LLC; Pad ID: Sturgis South; ABR-202002004; Grugan and Gallagher Townships, Clinton County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 5.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 24, 2021.
16. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Herr; ABR-201102026.R2; Sheshequin Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 24, 2021.
17. Diversified Production, LLC; Pad ID: Longhorn C-1 (WDV1); ABR-201011061.R2; Jay Township, Elk County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 3.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 24, 2021.
18. SWN Production Company, LLC; Pad ID: Longacre Pad; ABR-201101029.R2; Jackson Township, Susquehanna County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.9900 mgd; Approval Date: February 24, 2021.
19. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: Red Tailed Hawk; ABR-201011027.R2; Covington Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 25, 2021.
20. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: DJ; ABR-201101021.R2; Wysox Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 25, 2021.
21. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Corl; ABR-201102011.R2; Colley Township, Sullivan County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 25, 2021.
22. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Harnish; ABR-201102006.R2; Sheshequin Township, Bradford County, Pa.;
23. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Bustin Homestead; ABR-201101025.R2; Sheshequin Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 25, 2021.
24. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Pad ID: Beeman; ABR-201101028.R2; Litchfield Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 7.5000 mgd; Approval Date: February 26, 2021.
25. Repsol Oil & Gas USA, LLC; Pad ID: PECK HILL FARM (05 178); ABR-201101019.R2; Windham Township, Bradford County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 6.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 26, 2021.
26. Chief Oil & Gas, LLC; Pad ID: Garrison Drilling Pad #1; ABR-201102032.R2; Lemon Township, Wyoming County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 2.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 26, 2021.
27. Seneca Resources Company, LLC; Pad ID: Stanley 1106; ABR-201102015.R2; Osceola Township, Tioga County, Pa.; Consumptive Use of Up to 4.0000 mgd; Approval Date: February 26, 2021.
Pub. L. 91-575, 84 Stat. 1509
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement.
The FAA is issuing this notice under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, to announce the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed LaGuardia Airport (LGA) Access Improvement Project and its connected actions (the Proposed Action). The Proposed Action would provide direct access between LGA and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) Mets-Willets Point Station and the New York City Transit (NYCT) 7 Line Mets-Willets Point Station. FAA is the lead federal agency in the preparation of the EIS, with cooperating agencies including National Park Service (U.S. Department of the Interior); U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; New York State Department of Transportation; and New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. The Final EIS was prepared to disclose the potential environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Action, including real property transactions under the New York State Eminent Domain Procedures Law. The Final EIS is available for download on the project website at
Mr. Andrew Brooks, Environmental Program Manager, Eastern Regional Office, AEA-610, Federal Aviation Administration, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, NY 11434. Telephone: 718-553-2511.
This notice continues the EIS process announced in the Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Initiate Section 106 Consultation for the Proposed LaGuardia Access Improvement Project at LaGuardia Airport (LGA), New York City, Queens County, New York, 84 FR 19151, May 3, 2019, follows meetings associated with the EIS announced in the Notice of Public Information Sessions on Alternatives Analysis for the Proposed LaGuardia Airport Access Improvement Project at LaGuardia Airport (LGA), New York City, Queens County, New York, 84 FR 66438, December 4, 2019, and follows release of the Draft EIS, which was made available for agency and public review as announced in the Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Notice of Public Workshops and Hearings for the Proposed LaGuardia Access Improvement Project at LaGuardia Airport (LGA), New York City, Queens County, New York 85 FR 51142, August 19, 2020.
This EIS was prepared in response to a proposal presented by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority). The Port Authority operates LGA under a lease agreement with the City of New York. FAA must decide whether to approve, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 47106 and 47107 relating to the eligibility of the Proposed Action for federal funding under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and/or under 49 U.S.C. 40117, as implemented by 14 CFR 158.25, to impose and use passenger facility charge (PFC) revenue collected for the Proposed Action to assist with construction of potentially eligible development items shown on the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). FAA approval of the eligibility for federal funding under AIP or to impose and use PFCs is a Federal action that must comply with NEPA requirements. The Port has indicated it intends to submit an application to impose and use PFCs, and this EIS was prepared in order to inform the environmental determinations required as part of such an application. FAA, as lead federal agency, invited the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; New York State Department of Transportation; and New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to participate as cooperating agencies, as described under 40 CFR 1501.6(a)(1), and the agencies accepted. Subsequent to release of the Draft EIS, the National Park Service (U.S. Department of the Interior) requested to become a cooperating agency, and FAA accepted this request.
The Final EIS presents the purpose and need for the Proposed Action, analysis of reasonable alternatives, discussion of impacts for each reasonable alternative, comments received on the Draft EIS, responses to comments received on the Draft EIS, and supporting appendices. The Proposed Action includes:
• Construction of an above ground fixed guideway automated people mover (APM) system approximately 2.3 miles in length that extends from the LGA Central Hall Building under construction to the Mets-Willets Point LIRR and NYC Transit 7 Line Stations;
• construction of two on-Airport APM stations (Central Hall APM Station and East APM Station) and one off-Airport APM station at Willets Point (Willets Point APM Station) that provides connections to the Mets-Willets Point LIRR and 7 Line stations;
• construction of passenger walkway systems to connect the APM stations to the passenger terminals, parking garages, and ground transportation facilities;
• construction of a multi-level APM operations, maintenance, and storage facility (OMSF) that includes up to 1,000 parking spaces (500 for airport employees, 250 for MTA employees, 50 for APM employees, and 200 for replacement Citi Field parking);
• construction of three traction power substations to provide power to the APM guideway: One located at the on-Airport East Station, another at-grade
• construction of a 27kV main substation located adjacent to the OMSF structure on MTA property;
• construction of utilities infrastructure, both new and modified, as needed, to support the Proposed Action, including a permanent stormwater outfall into Flushing Creek and a temporary stormwater outfall into Flushing Creek; and
• acquisition of temporary and permanent easements; no private property would be acquired.
The Proposed Action also includes various connected actions, including: Utility relocation and demolition of certain existing facilities; a temporary MTA bus storage/parking facility; relocation of up to 200 Citi Field parking spaces; demolition and replacement of the Passerelle Bridge; temporary walkway to maintain access between the transit stations and Flushing Meadows-Corona Park; modifications to the Mets-Willets Point LIRR Station, including new shuttle service on the LIRR Port Washington Line; and the relocation of several World's Fair Marina facilities, including a boat lift, finger piers and connected timber floating dock, Marina office and boatyard facility, boat storage and parking, and operations shed.
FAA provides the following notices:
• Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.8(c) that it used the NEPA process to notify the public of FAA's finding that the proposed undertaking would adversely affect properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. An executed Memorandum of Agreement to resolve adverse effects to historic properties is included in Appendix K.13 of the Final EIS.
• Pursuant to Section 4(f) of the DOT Act and Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act, FAA has prepared a Final Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Evaluation (see Appendix I of the Final EIS). The Proposed Action would have a significant impact on Section 4(f) resources and would require the conversion of approximately 0.5 acres of LWCF-obligated property, and a temporary non-conforming use of approximately 1.2 acres of LWCF-obligated property. These impacts and proposed mitigation are disclosed in Chapter 3.8 and Appendix I of the Final EIS.
• Pursuant to DOT Order 5610.2(b), DOT Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, the Proposed Action would have a significant impact on minority environmental justice populations. These impacts and proposed mitigation are disclosed in Chapter 3.14 of the Final EIS.
• Pursuant to Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, that the Proposed Action would temporarily affect less than 1 acre of jurisdictional wetlands in Flushing Creek and less than 1 acre of temporary and permanent impacts in Flushing Bay. Impacts to these aquatic resources and proposed mitigation are disclosed in Chapter 3.16 of the Final EIS.
• Pursuant to Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management that the Proposed Action would not result in a significant encroachment on floodplains. Impacts to floodplains are disclosed in Chapter 3.16 of the Final EIS.
Following a 30-day wait period, FAA may issue Record of Decision pursuant to 40 CFR 1503.4(c) [Council of Environmental Quality regulations] and FAA Orders 1050.1F and 5050.4B. FAA and the National Park Service (U.S. Department of Interior) may prepare a joint Record of Decision.
Notice and request for comments.
The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently the Bureau of the Fiscal Service within the Department of the Treasury is soliciting comments concerning the new collection, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation), proposed by the Agency.
Written comments should be received on or before May 17, 2021 to be assured of consideration.
Submit comments identified by Information Collection 1530-NEW, Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation), by any of the following methods:
•
•
Submit requests for additional information, including requests for copies of the collection instrument and supporting documents to Amber Chaudhry, Customer Experience Strategist,
These data collection efforts may be either qualitative or quantitative in nature or may consist of mixed methods. Additionally, data may be collected via a variety of means,
The results of the data collected will be used to improve the delivery of Federal services and programs. It will include the creation of personas, customer journey maps, and reports and summaries of customer feedback data and user insights. It will also provide government-wide data on customer experience that can be displayed on
As a general matter, these information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.
The Bureau will collect this information by electronic means when possible, as well as by mail, fax, telephone, technical discussions, and in-person interviews. The Bureau may also utilize observational techniques to collect this information.
44 U.S.C. 3501
Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury.
Notice of a new matching program.
Pursuant to section 552a(e)(12) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines on the Conduct of Matching Programs, and the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, notice is hereby given of the conduct of the a Computer Matching Program pertaining to the Do Not Pay Working System's support of the Small Business Administration's (SBA) COVID-19 response programs, including the Paycheck Protection Program, Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program, Targeted EIDL Advances, and the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant (SVOG) Program (collectively the “SBA Programs”). This matching program will provide SBA with information that will help it identify potentially improper payments in the SBA Programs.
Comments on this matching notice must be received no later than 30 days after date of publication in the
David J. Ambrose, Chief Security Officer/Chief Privacy Officer, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, 3201 Pennsy Drive, Warehouse “E”, Landover, MD 20785.
David J. Ambrose, Chief Security Officer/Chief Privacy Officer, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, 202-874-6488.
The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 101-503), amended the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the manner in which computer matching involving Federal agencies could be performed and adding certain protections for individuals applying for and receiving Federal benefits. Section 7201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-508) further amended the Privacy Act regarding protections for such individuals. Moreover, the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, (31 U.S.C. 3351
In accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3354, executive agencies are required to “review prepayment and preaward procedures and ensure that a thorough review of available databases with relevant information on eligibility occurs to determine program or award
The purpose of this program is to assist SBA in the identification of potentially improper payments. Information is disclosed pursuant to this matching program only for the purpose of, and to the extent necessary in, assisting SBA in its determination with respect to an applicant for assistance under the SBA Programs.
Individuals applying for or receiving benefits under the SBA Programs.
The source agency, SBA, will furnish information to the Do Not Pay Working System regarding SBA Program applicants or benefit recipients. The requests from the SBA may include: The applicant or benefit recipient's name (which may include their individual name and/or trading names, if applicable), Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN), type of TIN, DUNS number, address, date of birth, sex, telephone number(s), email address(es), payment information, associated banking information, and associated payment/transaction information. Fiscal Service will provide a response record for each individual identified by the source agency. When there is a match between a record provided by the source agency and one or more of the databases contained in the Do Not Pay Working System, the Do Not Pay Working System will disclose to the source agency the presence of a potentially matching record in the Do Not Pay Working System and the database(s) that contain the potentially matching record(s).
SBA's records are contained in SBA system of records 21 (Loan System). Fiscal Service's records are contained in Fiscal Service system of records Treasury/Fiscal Service .017—Do Not Pay Payment Verification Records, which was last published at 85 FR 11776 (Feb. 27, 2020).
National Cemetery Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
The National Cemetery Administration (NCA), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed collection of information should be received on or before May 17, 2021.
Submit written comments on the collection of information through Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
Under the PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. This request for comment is being made pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA.
With respect to the following collection of information, NCA invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of NCA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of NCA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology.
• Information about the Presidential Memorial Certificate (PMC) Program and the option to receive a PMC in addition to the headstone, marker or medallion, consistent with 38 U.S.C. 112.
• Changes in eligibility for a medallion, consistent with 38 U.S.C. 2306(d)(4)(A).
• Addition of race, ethnicity, gender identify, and age demographic information for VA's statistical purposes (see item 11), consistent with Public Law 103-446, Section 509, Center for Minority Veterans and Center for Women Veterans.
• Addition of new emblems of belief consistent with 38 U.S.C. 2306(c) and 38 CFR 38.630(b) and 38.632(b)(2).
• Update parenthetical in Block 12 to (OPTIONAL, BUT IF INCLUDED, NO PAY GRADES)
• Update parenthetical in Block 14 to (OPTIONAL, BUT IF INCLUDED PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION)
• Update parenthetical in Block 16 to (OPTIONAL, BUT IF PROVIDED CHECK ALL APPLICABLE BOXES)
• Addition of statement in the Transportation and Delivery of Marker section for consignee to inspect the headstone or marker for accuracy prior to installation.
• Addition of information and picture of new small flat granite marker, consistent with 38 U.S.C. 2306(c) and 38 CFR 38.630(a).
Upon appropriate approval, the VA website will display the updated
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed collection of information should be received on or before May 17, 2021.
Submit written comments on the collection of information through Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
Under the PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. This request for comment is being made pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA.
With respect to the following collection of information, VBA invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of VBA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of VBA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology.
No substantive changes have been made to this form. The respondent burden has increased due to the estimated number of receivables averaged over the past two years.
By direction of the Secretary.
Department of State.
Final rule.
The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to include Russia in the list of enumerated countries with respect to which it is the policy of the United States to deny licenses and other approvals for exports and/or imports of defense articles and defense services, except as otherwise provided. This action reflects a policy determination made by the Secretary of State.
The rule is effective on March 18, 2021.
Director, Response Team, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, U.S. Department of State, telephone (202) 663-1282, or email
On March 1, 2021, the Secretary of State determined pursuant to Section 306(a) of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (“CBW Act”) that the Government of Russia used chemical weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical weapons against its own nationals. Pursuant to this determination, the Department of State published
The Department of State is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules implementing this function are exempt from sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554 (adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Since the Department is of the opinion that this rule is exempt from 5 U.S.C 553, it is the view of the Department that the provisions of Section 553(d) do not apply to this rulemaking.
Since this rule is exempt from the notice-and-comment provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b), it does not require analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This rulemaking does not involve a mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The Department does not believe this rulemaking is a major rule within the definition of 5 U.S.C. 804.
This rulemaking will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this proposed amendment does not have sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this rulemaking.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributed impacts, and equity). Because the scope of this rule implements a governmental policy limiting defense trade with a country, and does not impose additional regulatory requirements or obligations, the Department believes costs associated with this rule will be minimal. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action” by the Office and Information and Regulatory Affairs under Executive Order 12866.
The Department of State has reviewed this rulemaking in light of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
The Department of State has determined that this rulemaking will not have tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not preempt tribal law. Accordingly, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose or revise any information collections subject to 44 U.S.C. chapter 35.
Arms and munitions, Exports.
For the reasons set forth above, title 22, chapter I, subchapter M, part 126 is amended as follows:
22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2780, 2791, and 2797; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 287c; Sec. 1225, Pub. L. 108-375; Sec. 7089, Pub. L. 111-117; Pub. L. 111-266; Sections 7045 and 7046, Pub. L. 112-74; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
(a) * * * The exemptions provided in this subchapter, except §§ 123.17, 126.4(a)(1) or (3) and (b)(1), and 126.4(a)(2) or (b)(2) when the export is destined for Russia and in support of government space cooperation, and § 126.6, or when the recipient is a U.S. government department or agency, do not apply with respect to defense articles or defense services originating in or for export to any proscribed countries, areas, or persons. * * *
(d) * * *
(2) * * *
(l)
(1) For government space cooperation; and
(2) Prior to September 1, 2021, for commercial space launches.
Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, Department of State.
Notice of sanctions.
The Secretary of State, acting under authority delegated pursuant to Executive Order 12851, has determined pursuant to the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991, that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals. In addition, the Secretary of State has determined and certified to Congress that it is essential to the national security interests of the United States to partially waive the application of the sanctions required under the Act with respect to foreign assistance, licenses for the export of items on the U.S. Munitions List (USML), and the licensing of national security-sensitive goods and technology. This document is a notice of the sanctions to be imposed pursuant to the Act, subject to these waivers.
These sanctions are effective on March 18, 2021.
Pamela K. Durham, Office of Missile, Biological, and Chemical Nonproliferation, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, Department of State, Telephone (202) 647-4930.
Pursuant to sections 306(a), 307(a), and 307(d) of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (22 U.S.C. 5604(a), 5605(a), and 5605(d)), on March 1, 2021 the Secretary of State determined that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals. As a result, the following sanctions are hereby imposed:
1.
The Secretary of State has determined that it is essential to the national security interests of the United States to waive the application of this restriction.
2.
The Secretary of State has determined that it is essential to the national security interests of the United States to waive the application of this sanction with respect to the issuance of licenses in support of government space cooperation, provided that such licenses shall be issued on a case-by-case basis and consistent with export licensing policy for Russia prior to the date of the determination.
The Secretary of State has further determined that it is essential to the national security interests of the United States to waive the application of this sanction with respect to the issuance of licenses in support of commercial space launches, provided that prior to September 1 2021, such licenses shall be issued on a case-by-case basis and consistent with export licensing policy for Russia prior to the date of the determination, and provided further that after September 1, 2021, such licenses shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and subject to a policy of denial.
3.
4.
5.
The Secretary of State has determined that it is essential to the national security interests of the United States to waive the application of this sanction with respect to the following:
These measures shall be implemented by the responsible departments and agencies of the United States Government and will remain in place