Meeting Agenda I. Motion to Approve Commissioner Norma Cantú to Serve as USCCR Chair II. Approval of Agenda III. Business Meeting A. Discussion and Vote on Statement of Walter E. Williams B. Discussion and Vote to continue the Policy of Rebuttals and Surrebuttals C. Discussion and Vote to suspend Speaker Series D. Discussion and Agreement to Appoint Bipartisan Commissioners to EAC E. Discovery and Vote on FEMA Report Discovery Plan F. Management and Operations • Staff Director's Report IV. Adjourn Meeting Dated: April 9, 2021. Angelia Rorison, [FR Doc. 2021-07680 Filed 4-12-21; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE P COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Background

In accordance with sections 705(d) and 735(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on February 22, 2021, Commerce published its affirmative final determination of sales at less-than-fair-value (LTFV)  1 and its affirmative final determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of twist ties from China. 2 On April 8, 2021, the ITC notified Commerce of its final affirmative determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of LTFV imports and subsidized imports of twist ties from China, within the meaning of sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act. 3

The products covered by these orders are twist ties from China. For a complete description of the scope of the orders, see Appendix to this notice.

On April 8, 2021, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of imports of twist ties from China. 4 Therefore, Commerce is issuing this AD order in accordance with sections 735(c)(2) and 736 of the Act. Because the ITC determined that imports of twist ties from China are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.

Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise for all relevant entries of twist ties from China. Antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of twist ties from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after December 10, 2020, the date of publication of the LTFV Preliminary Determination, but will not be assessed on entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, as further described below. 5

In accordance with section 736 of the Act, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on all relevant entries of twist ties from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register . These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. For each producer and exporter combination, Commerce will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits for estimated antidumping duties equal to the cash deposit rates listed below.

Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, CBP will require, at the same time as an importer of record would normally deposit estimated duties on the subject merchandise, a cash deposit for each entry of subject merchandise equal to the cash deposit rates listed below. 6 As stated in the LTFV Final Determination, Commerce made certain adjustments for export subsidies from the CVD Final Determination to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin to determine each of the cash deposit rates.

Section 733(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except that Commerce may extend the four-month period to no more than six months at the request of exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise. Commerce published its LTFV Preliminary Determination on December 10, 2020. 8 Commerce's LTFV Final Determination published on February 22, 2021. 9 Therefore, the four-month period beginning on the date of publication of the LTFV Preliminary Determination ended on April 8, 2021.

Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of twist ties from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after April 8, 2021, the date on which the provisional measures expired, through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register .

On April 8, 2021, in accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of imports of twist ties from China. 10 Therefore, Commerce is issuing this CVD order in accordance with sections 705(c)(2) and 706 of the Act. Because the ITC determined that imports of twist ties from China are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption are subject to the assessment of countervailing duties.

Therefore, in accordance with section 706(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties on all relevant entries of twist ties from China. Countervailing duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of twist ties from China which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after December 1, 2020, the date of publication of the CVD Preliminary Determination, 11 but will not be assessed on entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, as further described below.

In accordance with section 706 of the Act, we will instruct CBP to reinstitute suspension of liquidation on all relevant entries of twist ties from China, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register , and to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, countervailing duties for each entry of the subject merchandise in an amount based on the net countervailable subsidy rate for the subject merchandise. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. Commerce will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on the subject merchandise, a cash deposit for each entry of subject merchandise equal to the subsidy rates listed below. 12 The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed below, as appropriate.

Section 703(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation instructions issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. Commerce published its CVD Preliminary Determination on December 1, 2020. Therefore, the provisional measures period, beginning on the date of publication of the CVD Preliminary Determination, ended on March 30, 2021. Pursuant to section 707(b) of the Act, the collection of cash deposits at the rate listed above will begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations.

Therefore, in accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, Commerce instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, unliquidated entries of twist ties from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after March 30, 2021, the date on which the provisional measures expired, through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determinations in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register .

This notice constitutes the AD and CVD orders with respect to twist ties from China pursuant to sections 706(a) and 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

These orders are published in accordance with sections 706(a) and 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

Background

On September 3, 2019, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the order on HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey for the period of January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018. 1 On September 30, 2019, Commerce received timely requests for an administrative review from the petitioners and Ozdemir, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b). 2 Commerce received no other requests for administrative review.

On November 12, 2019, pursuant to these requests, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce published a notice in the Federal Register initiating an administrative review of the CVD order on HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey. 3 On February 10, 2020, the petitioners timely withdrew their request for an administrative review with respect to Agir Haddecilik A.S., Cag Celik Demir ve Celik Endustri A.S., Cinar Boru Profil San Ve Tic. A.S., Mescier Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sti., MTS Lojistik ve Tasimacilik Hizmetleri TIC A.C. Istanbul, Noksel Celik Boru Sanayi A, SEBA Dis Ticaret AS., and Tosyali Toyo Celik A.S. 4 As a result, the only company for which the request for review was not withdrawn was Ozdemir.

On January 27, 2021, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of the administrative review with respect to Ozdemir. 5 Commerce gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. 6 No interested parties submitted comments. Commerce has conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Act.

The products covered by the order are shipments of certain heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. The merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-500, grade B specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.

Included products are those in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements below exceed the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

• 2.50 percent of manganese, or

• 3.30 percent of silicon, or

• 1.50 percent of copper, or

• 1.50 percent of aluminum, or

• 1.25 percent of chromium, or

• 0.30 percent of cobalt, or

• 0.40 percent of lead, or

• 2.0 percent of nickel, or

• 0.30 percent of tungsten, or

• 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or

• 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or

• 0.30 percent of vanadium, or

• 0.30 percent of zirconium.

The subject merchandise is currently provided for in item 7306.61.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS 7306.61.3000. While the HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specification are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

As no parties submitted comments on the Preliminary Results, we made no changes to the subsidy calculations for Ozdemir in the final results of this review.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party that requested a review withdraws the request within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The petitioners' withdrawal request was timely submitted, and no other interested party requested an administrative review of the eight companies named above. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this administrative review of the CVD order on HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey, in part, with respect to the aforementioned eight companies.

In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine that the following net countervailable subsidy rate exists for Ozdemir for the period January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018:  7

The NOAA Science Advisory Board (SAB) was established by a Decision Memorandum dated September 25, 1997, and is the only Federal Advisory Committee with responsibility to advise the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere on strategies for research, education, and application of science to operations and information services. SAB activities and advice provide necessary input to ensure that National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) science programs are of the highest quality and provide optimal support to resource management.

Status: The April 30, 2021 meeting will be open to public participation with a 5-minute public comment period at 4:55 p.m. EDT. The July 20 and 22, 2021 meeting will be open to public participation with a 15-minute public comment period at 4:45 p.m. EDT on July 20. The SAB expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted verbal or written statements. In general, each individual or group making a verbal presentation will be limited to a total time of three minutes. Written comments for the April 30, 2021 meeting should be received by in the SAB Executive Director's Office by April 23, 2021 to provide sufficient time for SAB review. Written comments for the July 20 and 22, 2021 meeting should be received in the SAB Executive Director's Office by July 1, 2021 to provide sufficient time for SAB review. Written comments received by the SAB Executive Director after these dates will be distributed to the SAB, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting date.

Special Accommodations: This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for special accommodations may be directed to the Executive Director no later than 12 p.m. on April 23, 2021 for the April 30, 2021 meeting and by July 1, 2021 for the July 20 and 22, 2021 meeting.

Matters to be Considered: The meeting on April 30, 2021 will consider the Environmental Information Services Working Group's Statement on the National Weather Service Data Throttling Concerns. The meeting on July 20 and 22, 2021 will include (1) NOAA updates; (2) Update from the Tsunami Science and Technology Advisory Panel; (3) Review of the Cooperative Institute for Great Lakes Research Review Report; (4) SAB Priorities for Weather Research Study update; (5) NOAA Response to the SAB review of the NOAA Precipitation Prediction Grand Challenge Plan; and (6) Environmental Information Services Working Group's report to Congress. The full agendas will be published on the SAB website. Meeting materials, including work products, will also be available on the SAB website: http://sab.noaa.gov/SABMeetings.aspx.

Under the Direct Loan Program, borrowers may choose to repay their non-defaulted loans (Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, Direct PLUS Loans made to graduate or professional students, and Direct Consolidation Loans) under the ICR plan. The ICR plan bases the borrower's repayment amount on the borrower's Adjusted Gross Income (AGI), family size, loan amount, and the interest rate applicable to each of the borrower's loans.

ICR is one of several income-driven repayment plans. Other income-driven repayment plans include the Income-Based Repayment (IBR) plan, the Pay As You Earn Repayment (PAYE) plan, and the Revised Pay As You Earn Repayment (REPAYE) plan. The IBR, PAYE, and REPAYE plans provide lower payment amounts than the ICR plan for most borrowers.

A Direct Loan borrower who repays under the ICR plan pays the lesser of: (1) The monthly amount that would be required over a 12-year repayment period with fixed payments, multiplied by an income percentage factor; or (2) 20 percent of discretionary income.

Each year, to reflect changes in inflation, we adjust the income percentage factor used to calculate a borrower's ICR payment, as required by 34 CFR 685.209(b)(1)(ii)(A). We use the adjusted income percentage factors to calculate a borrower's monthly ICR payment amount when the borrower initially applies for the ICR plan or when the borrower submits his or her annual income documentation, as required under the ICR plan. This notice contains the adjusted income percentage factors for 2021, examples of how the monthly payment amount in ICR is calculated, and charts showing sample repayment amounts based on the adjusted ICR plan formula. This information is included in the following three attachments:

In Attachment 1, to reflect changes in inflation, we updated the income percentage factors that were published in the Federal Register on June 02, 2020 (85 FR 33639). Specifically, we have revised the table of income percentage factors by changing the dollar amounts of the incomes shown by a percentage equal to the estimated percentage change between the not-seasonally-adjusted Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers for December 2020 and December 2021.

The income percentage factors reflected in Attachment 1 may cause a borrower's payments to be lower than they were in prior years, even if the borrower's income is the same as in the prior year. The revised repayment amount more accurately reflects the impact of inflation on the borrower's current ability to repay.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site, you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

General notes about the examples in this attachment:

• We have a calculator that borrowers can use to estimate what their payment amounts would be under the ICR plan. The calculator is called the “Loan Simulator” and is available at studentaid.gov/loan-simulator . Based on information entered into the calculator by the borrower (for example, income, family size, and tax filing status), this calculator provides a detailed, individualized assessment of a borrower's loans and repayment plan options, including the ICR plan.

• The interest rates used in the examples are for illustration only. The actual interest rates on an individual borrower's Direct Loans depend on the loan type and when the postsecondary institution first disbursed the Direct Loan to the borrower.

• The Poverty Guideline amounts used in the examples are from the 2021 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Poverty Guidelines for the 48 contiguous States and the District of Columbia. Different Poverty Guidelines apply to residents of Alaska and Hawaii. The Poverty Guidelines for 2021 were published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2021 (86 FR 7732).

• All of the examples use an income percentage factor corresponding to an adjusted gross income (AGI) in the table in Attachment 1. If an AGI is not listed in the income percentage factors table in Attachment 1, the applicable income percentage can be calculated by following the instructions under the “Interpolation” heading later in this attachment.

• Married borrowers may repay their Direct Loans jointly under the ICR plan. If a married couple elects this option, we add the outstanding balance on the Direct Loans of each borrower and we add together both borrowers' AGIs to determine a joint ICR payment amount. We then prorate the joint payment amount for each borrower based on the proportion of that borrower's debt to the total outstanding balance. We bill each borrower separately.

• For example, if a married couple, John and Briana, has a total outstanding Direct Loan debt of $60,000, of which $40,000 belongs to John and $20,000 to Briana, we would apportion 67 percent of the monthly ICR payment to John and the remaining 33 percent to Briana. To take advantage of a joint ICR payment, married couples need not file taxes jointly; they may file separately and subsequently provide the other spouse's tax information to the borrower's Federal loan servicer.

Calculating the monthly payment amount using a standard amortization and a 12-year repayment period.

The formula to amortize a loan with a standard schedule (in which each payment is the same over the course of the repayment period) is as follows:

For example, assume that Billy has a $10,000 Direct Unsubsidized Loan with an interest rate of 6 percent.

Step 1: To solve for M, first simplify the numerator of the fraction by which we multiply P, the outstanding principal balance. To do this divide I (the interest rate expressed as a decimal) by 12. In this example, Billy's interest rate is 6 percent. As a decimal, 6 percent is 0.06.

Step 2: Next, simplify the denominator of the fraction by which we multiply P. To do this divide I (the interest rate expressed as a decimal) by 12. Then, add one. Next, raise the sum of the two figures to the negative power that corresponds to the length of the repayment period in months. In this example, because we are amortizing a loan to calculate the monthly payment amount under the ICR plan, the applicable figure is 12 years, which is 144 months. Finally, subtract the result from one.

Step 3: Next, resolve the fraction by dividing the result from Step 1 by the result from Step 2.

Step 4: Finally, solve for M, the monthly payment amount, by multiplying the outstanding principal balance of the loan by the result of Step 3.

The remainder of the examples in this attachment will only show the results of the formula. In each of the examples, the Direct Loan amounts represent the outstanding principal balance at the time the loans entered repayment.

Example 1. Kesha is single with no dependents and has $15,000 in Direct Subsidized and Unsubsidized Loans. The interest rate on Kesha's loans is 6 percent, and she has an AGI of $32,238.

Step 1: Determine the total monthly payment amount based on what Kesha would pay over 12 years using standard amortization. To do this, use the formula that precedes Example 1. In this example, the monthly payment amount would be $146.38.

Step 2: Multiply the result of Step 1 by the income percentage factor shown in the income percentage factors table (see Attachment 1 to this notice) that corresponds to Kesha's AGI. In this example, an AGI of $32,238 corresponds to an income percentage factor of 71.89 percent.

Step 3: Now, determine the monthly payment amount equal to 20 percent of Kesha's discretionary income (discretionary income is AGI minus the HHS Poverty Guideline amount for a borrower's family size and State of residence). To do this, subtract the HHS Poverty Guideline amount for a family of one from Kesha's AGI, multiply the result by 20 percent, and then divide by 12:

Step 4: Compare the amount from Step 2 with the amount from Step 3. In this example, Kesha would pay the amount calculated under Step 2 ($105.23), since this is the lesser of the two payment amounts.

Note: Kesha would have a lower payment under other income-driven repayment plans. Specifically, Kesha's payment would be $107.65 under the PAYE and REPAYE plans. However, Kesha's payment would be $161.48 under the IBR plan, which is higher than the payment she would have under the ICR plan.

Example 2. Paul is married to Jesse and they have no dependents. They file their Federal income tax return jointly. Paul has a Direct Loan balance of $10,000, and Jesse has a Direct Loan balance of $15,000. Each of their Direct Loans has an interest rate of 6 percent.

Paul and Jesse have a combined AGI of $91,051 and are repaying their loans jointly under the ICR plan (for general information regarding joint ICR payments for married couples, see the fifth and sixth bullets under the heading “General notes about the examples in this attachment”).

Step 1: Add Paul's and Jesse's Direct Loan balances to determine their combined aggregate loan balance:

Step 2: Determine the combined monthly payment amount for Paul and Jesse based on what both borrowers would pay over 12 years using standard amortization. To do this, use the formula that precedes Example 1. In this example, their combined monthly payment amount would be $243.96.

Step 3: Multiply the result of Step 2 by the income percentage factor shown in the income percentage factors table (see Attachment 1 to this notice) that corresponds to Paul and Jesse's combined AGI. In this example, the combined AGI of $91,051 corresponds to an income percentage factor of 109.40 percent.

Step 4: Now, determine the monthly payment amount equal to 20 percent of Paul and Jesse's combined discretionary income (discretionary income is AGI minus the HHS Poverty Guideline amount for a borrower's family size and State of residence). To do this, subtract the Poverty Guideline amount for a family of two from the combined AGI, multiply the result by 20 percent, and then divide by 12:

Step 5: Compare the amount from Step 3 with the amount from Step 4. Paul and Jesse would jointly pay the amount calculated under Step 3 ($266.90), since this is the lesser of the two amounts.

Note: For Paul and Jesse, the ICR plan provides the lowest monthly payment of any income-driven repayment plan available. Paul and Jesse would not be eligible for the IBR or PAYE plans, and they would have a combined monthly payment under the REPAYE plan of $541.01.

Step 6: Because Paul and Jesse are jointly repaying their Direct Loans under the ICR plan, the monthly payment amount calculated under Step 5 applies to Paul's and Jesse's combined loans. To determine the amount for which each borrower will be responsible, prorate the amount calculated under Step 4 by each spouse's share of the combined Direct Loan debt. Paul has a Direct Loan debt of $10,000 and Jesse has a Direct Loan debt of $15,000. For Paul, the monthly payment amount will be:

Example 3. Santiago is single with no dependents and has a combined balance of $60,000 in Direct Subsidized and Unsubsidized Loans. Each of Santiago's loans has an interest rate of 6 percent, and Santiago's AGI is $38,359.

Step 1: Determine the total monthly payment amount based on what Santiago would pay over 12 years using standard amortization. To do this, use the formula that precedes Example 1. In this example, the monthly payment amount would be $585.51.

Step 2: Multiply the result of Step 1 by the income percentage factor shown in the income percentage factors table (see Attachment 1 to this notice) that corresponds to Santiago's AGI. In this example, an AGI of $38,359 corresponds to an income percentage factor of 80.33 percent.

Step 3: Now, determine the monthly payment amount equal to 20 percent of Santiago's discretionary income (discretionary income is AGI minus the HHS Poverty Guideline amount for a borrower's family size and State of residence). To do this, subtract the HHS Poverty Guideline amount for a family of one from Santiago's AGI, multiply the result by 20 percent, and then divide by 12:

Step 4: Compare the amount from Step 2 with the amount from Step 3. In this example, Santiago would pay the amount calculated under Step 3 ($424.65), since this is the lesser of the two amounts.

Note: Santiago would have a lower payment under each of the other income-driven plans. Specifically, Santiago's payment would be $158.66 under the PAYE and REPAYE plans and $237.99 under the IBR plan.

Interpolation. If an AGI is not included on the income percentage factor table, calculate the income percentage factor through linear interpolation. For example, assume that Jocelyn is single with an AGI of $50,000.

Step 1: Find the closest AGI listed that is less than Jocelyn's AGI of $50,000 ($48,180) and the closest AGI listed that is greater than Jocelyn's AGI of $50,000 ($60,426).

Step 2: Subtract the lower amount from the higher amount (for this discussion we will call the result the “income interval”):

Step 3: Determine the difference between the two income percentage factors that correspond to the AGIs used in Step 2 (for this discussion, we will call the result the “income percentage factor interval”):

Step 4: Subtract from Jocelyn's AGI the closest AGI shown on the chart that is less than Jocelyn's AGI of $50,000:

• $50,000−$48,180 = $1,820

Step 5: Divide the result of Step 4 by the income interval determined in Step 2:

Step 6: Multiply the result of Step 5 by the income percentage factor interval that was calculated in Step 3:

Step 7: Add the result of Step 6 to the lower of the two income percentage factors used in Step 3 to calculate the income percentage factor interval for an AGI of $50,000:

The result is the income percentage factor that we will use to calculate Jocelyn's monthly repayment amount under the ICR plan.

Below are two charts that provide first-year payment amount estimates for a variety of loan debt sizes and AGIs under each of the income-driven repayment plans and the 10-Year Standard Repayment Plan. The first chart is for single borrowers who have a family size of one. The second chart is for a borrower who is married or a head of household and who has a family size of three. The calculations in Attachment 3 assume that the loan debt has an interest rate of 6 percent. For married borrowers, the calculations assume that the borrower files a joint Federal income tax return and that the borrower's spouse does not have Federal student loans. A field with a “-” character indicates that the borrower in the example would not be eligible to enter the applicable income-driven repayment plan based on the borrower's AGI, loan debt, and family size.

The Commission 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.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) 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. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the FCC seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”

OMB Control Number: 3060-1189.

Title: Signal Boosters, Sections 1.1307(b)(1), 20.3, 20.21(a)(2), 20.21(a)(5), 20.21(e)(2), 20.21(e)(8)(I)(G), 20.21(e)(9)(I)(H), 20.21(f), 20.21(h), 22.9, 24.9, 27.9. 90.203, 90.219(b)(l)(I), 90.219(d)(5), and 90.219(e)(5).

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, Not for profit institutions and Individuals or household.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 632,534 respondents and 635,214 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .5 hours-40 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement, On occasion reporting requirement and Third-party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(g), 303(r) and 332.

Total Annual Burden: 324,465 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Impact Assessment: This information collection affects individuals or households; thus, there are impacts under the Privacy Act. However, the government is not directly collecting this information and the R&O directs carriers to protect the information to the extent it is considered Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a three-year time period for this information collection requirements approved under this collection. The following information collection requirements are approved under this collection: Labeling Requirements: Sections 20.21(a)(5), 20.21(f), 90.219(e)(5)—In order to avoid consumer confusion and provide consumers with needed information, the Commission adopted labeling requirements for Consumer and Industrial Signal Boosters. Consumer Signal Boosters must be labeled to identify the device as a “consumer” device and make the consumer aware that the device must be registered; may only be operated with the consent of the consumer's wireless provider; may only be operated with approved antennas and cables; and that E911 communications may be affected for calls served by using the device. Industrial Signal Boosters must include a label stating that the device is not a consumer device, is designed for installation by FCC licensees or a qualified installer, and the operator must have a FCC license or consent of a FCC licensee to operate the device. Accordingly, all signal boosters marketed on or after March 1, 2014, must include the advisories (1) in on-line point-of-sale marketing materials; (2) in any print or on-line owner's manual and installation instructions; (3) on the outside packaging of the device; and (4) on a label affixed to the device. Part 90 signal boosters marketed or sold on or after March 1, 2014, must include a label stating that the device is not a consumer device; the operator must have a FCC license or consent of a FCC licensee to operate the device; the operator must register Class B signal boosters; and unauthorized use may result in significant forfeitures.

Section 20.21(f)(1)(iv)(A)(2)—In order to ensure that consumers are properly informed about which devices are suitable for their use and how to comply with our rules, the Commission required that all Consumer Signal Boosters certified for fixed, in-building operation include a label directing consumers that the device may only be operated in a fixed, in-building location. The Verizon Petitioners state that this additional labeling requirement is necessary to inform purchasers of fixed Consumer Signal Boosters that they may not lawfully be installed and operated in a moving vehicle or outdoor location. We recognize that our labeling requirement imposes additional costs on entities that manufacture Consumer Signal Boosters; however, on balance, we find that such costs are outweighed by the benefits of ensuring that consumers purchase appropriate devices. Accordingly, all fixed Consumer Signal Boosters, both Provider-Specific and Wideband, manufactured or imported on or after one year from the effective date of the rule change must include the following advisory (1) in on-line point-of-sale marketing materials, (2) in any print or on-line owner's manual and installation instructions, (3) on the outside packaging of the device, and (4) on a label affixed to the device: “This device may be operated ONLY in a fixed location for in-building use.”

Section 1.1307(b)(1)—Radiofrequency (RF). This rule requires that a label is affixed to the transmitting antenna that provides adequate notice regarding potential RF safety hazards and references the applicable FCC-adopted limits for RF exposure. Provider Reporting Requirement: In order to facilitate review of wireless providers' behavior regarding Consumer Signal Boosters, the R&O requires that on March 1, 2015, and March 1, 2016, all nationwide wireless providers publicly indicate their status regarding consent for each Consumer Signal Booster that has received FCC certification as listed in a Public Notice to be released by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 30 days prior to each reporting date. For each listed Consumer Signal Booster, wireless providers should publicly indicate whether they (1) consent to use of the device; (2) do not consent to use of the device; or (3) are still considering whether or not they will consent to the use of the device.

Registration Requirements: Section 20.21(a)(2)—The rules require signal booster operators to register Consumer Signal Boosters, existing and new, with their serving wireless providers prior to operation. This is a mandatory requirement to continue or begin operation of a Consumer Signal Booster. The registration requirement will aid in interference resolution and facilitate provider control over Consumer Signal Boosters. The information collection contained in Section 20.21(a)(2) affects individuals or households; thus, there are impacts under the Privacy Act. However, the government is not directly collecting this information and the R&O directs carriers to protect the information to the extent it is considered Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI).

Section 20.21(h)—By March 1, 2014, all providers who voluntarily consent to the use of Consumer Signal Boosters on their networks must establish a free registration system for their subscribers. At a minimum, providers must collect (1) the name of the Consumer Signal Booster owner and/or operator, if different individuals; (2) the make, model, and serial number of the device; (3) the location of the device; and (4) the date of initial operation. Otherwise, the Commission permits providers to develop their own registration systems to facilitate provider control and interference resolution, providers should collect only such information that is reasonably related to achieving these dual goals. Wireless providers may determine how to collect such information and how to keep it up-to-date. Section 90.219(d)(5)—This rule requires operators of Part 90 Class B signal boosters to register these devices in a searchable on-line database that will be maintained and operated by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau via delegated authority from the Commission. The Commission believes this will be a valuable tool to resolve interference should it occur.

Certification Requirements: Sections 20.3, 20.21(e)(2), 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G), 20.21(e)(9)(i)(H), 90.203—These rules, in conjunction with the R&O, require that signal booster manufacturers demonstrate that they meet the new technical specifications using the existing and unchanged equipment authorization application, including submitting a technical document with the application for FCC equipment authorization that shows compliance of all antennas, cables and/or coupling devices with the requirements of § 20.21(e). The R&O further provides that manufacturers must make certain certifications when applying for device certification. Manufacturers must provide an explanation of all measures taken to ensure that the technical safeguards designed to inhibit harmful interference and protect wireless networks cannot be deactivated by the user. The R&O requires that manufacturers of Provider-Specific Consumer Signal Boosters may only be certificated with the consent of the licensee so the manufacturer must certify that it has obtained such consent as part of the equipment certification process. The R&O also requires that if a manufacturer claims that a device will not affect E911 communications, the manufacturer must certify this claim during the equipment certification process. Note: The “application for equipment” certification requirements are met under OMB Control Number 3060-0057, FCC Form 731.

Antenna Kitting Documentation Requirement: Sections 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G), 20.21(e)(9)(i)(H)—The rules require that all consumer boosters must be sold with user manuals specifying all antennas and cables that meet the requirements of this section. Part 90 Licensee Consent Documentation Requirement: Section 90.219(b)(1)(i)—This rule requires that non-licensees seeking to operate part 90 signal boosters must obtain the express consent of the licensee(s) of the frequencies for which the device or system is intended to amplify. The rules further require that such consent must be maintained in a recordable format that can be presented to a FCC representative or other relevant licensee investigating interference.

Cross-reference to Other Rule Parts: Sections 22.9, 24.9, and 27.9—Operation of a consumer signal booster under Parts 22, 24, and 27 of the Commission's rules must also comply with section 20.21 of the Commission's rules, including all relevant information collections.

In the Federal Register of July 22, 2019, in FR Doc 2019-15280, on page 35188, in the first column, after EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM, please correct the following:

Delete in entirety “None” and insert “Portions of the records in this system of records were compiled for law enforcement purposes and are exempt from disclosure under 12 CFR 310.13 and 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). Federal criminal law enforcement investigatory reports maintained as part of this system may be the subject of exemptions imposed by the originating agency pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2).”

9000-0163, Small Business Size Rerepresentation.

This clearance covers the information that contractors must submit to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements:

52.219-28, Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation . This clause requires contractors who originally represented themselves as a small business for a contract award to rerepresent their size and socioeconomic status at the prime contract level by updating their representations in the Representations and Certifications section of the System for Award Management (SAM). Contractors are also required to notify the contracting officer by email, or otherwise in writing, that the rerepresentations have been made, and provide the date on which they were made.

Small business contractors are required to rerepresent their size and socioeconomic status upon occurrence of any of the following:

• Within 30 days after execution of a novation agreement or within 30 days after modification of the contract to include FAR clause 52.219-28 if the novation agreement was executed prior to inclusion of this clause in the contract.

• Within 30 days after a merger or acquisition that does not require a novation or within 30 days after modification of the contract to include FAR clause 52.219-28 if the merger or acquisition occurred prior to inclusion of this clause in the contract.

• For long-term contracts—

Within 60 to 120 days prior to the end of the fifth year of the contract; and

Within 60 to 120 days prior to the date specified in the contract for exercising any option thereafter.

• When contracting officers explicitly require it for an order issued under a multiple-award contract.

The collected information is used by the Small Business Administration, Congress, Federal agencies and the general public for various reasons such as determining if agencies are meeting statutory goals, set-aside determinations, and market research.

Respondents: 2,647.

Total Annual Responses: 4,029.

Total Burden Hours: 2,014.5.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 86 FR 8019, on February 3, 2021. No comments were received.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0163, Small Business Size Rerepresentation.

9000-0188, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

This clearance covers the information that offerors contractors must submit to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements:

52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

Notification. Paragraph (d) of this clause requires contractors to notify the contracting officer and the agency Inspector General of—

• Any credible information they receive from any source that alleges a contractor employee, subcontractor, or subcontractor employee, or their agent has engaged in conduct that violates the policy in paragraph (b) of the clause 52.222-50; and

• Any actions taken against a contractor employee, subcontractor, subcontractor employee, or their agent pursuant to this clause.

Compliance Plan and Annual Certification. Paragraph (h) of the clause contains an additional requirement for contracts for supplies (other than commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items) to be acquired outside the United States and contracts for services to be performed outside the United States, with an estimated value exceeding $550,000, where the contractor is to maintain a compliance plan during the performance of the contract. This compliance plan must include an awareness program, a process for employees to report activity inconsistent with the zero-tolerance policy, a recruitment and wage plan, a housing plan, and procedures to prevent subcontractors from engaging in trafficking in persons.

• Contractors are required to provide the compliance plan to the contracting officer upon request.

• Contractors are required to submit a certification to the contracting officer annually after receiving an award, asserting that they have the required compliance plan in place and that there have been no abuses, or that appropriate actions have been taken if abuses have been found.

• For those subcontractors required to submit a certification (see next bullet on flow down), contractors shall require that submission prior to award of the subcontract and annually thereafter.

Portions of this clause flows down to all subcontractors. The requirements related to the compliance plan only flow down to subcontracts exceeding $550,000 for supplies (other than COTS items) acquired and services performed outside the United States.

This clause applies to commercial item acquisitions, except the portions related to the compliance plan do not apply to acquisitions of COTS items.

52.222-56, Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance Plan.

This provision requires apparently successful offerors to submit a certification, prior to award, that they have implemented a compliance plan and that there have been no abuses, or that appropriate actions have been taken if abuses have been found.

The provision requires this certification for the portion of contracts exceeding $550,000 for supplies (other than COTS items) acquired and services performed outside the United States.

This provision applies to commercial item acquisitions, except acquisitions of COTS items.

FAR 52.222-50, paragraph (d)—Notification. The Government uses this notification of potential violations of trafficking in persons requirements to investigate and take appropriate action if a violation has occurred.

FAR 52.222-50, paragraph (h)—Compliance Plan. The Government uses the compliance plan to ascertain compliance with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (22 U.S.C. 7104), Executive Order 13627, or any other applicable law or regulation.

FAR 52.222-50, paragraph (h) and FAR 52.222-56—Certification. The Government uses the certification to obtain reasonable assurance that the contractor and its subcontractors are aware of and complying with the requirements of the Executive Order and statute.

Respondents/Recordkeepers: 5,876.

Total Annual Responses: 11,702.

Total Burden Hours: 164,154. (25,722 reporting hours + 138,432 recordkeeping hours)).

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 86 FR 8360, on February 5, 2021. No comments were received.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov.

Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0188, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

This information collection supports our regulations in part 315 (21 CFR part 315) that require manufacturers of diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals to submit information that demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of: (1) A new diagnostic radiopharmaceutical; or (2) a new indication for use of an approved diagnostic radiopharmaceutical. Information about the safety or effectiveness of a diagnostic radiopharmaceutical enables us to properly evaluate the safety and effectiveness profiles of such radiopharmaceuticals.

The information, which is usually submitted as part of a new drug application (NDA) or biologics license application (BLA) or as a supplement to an approved application typically includes, but is not limited to, nonclinical and clinical data on the pharmacology; toxicology; adverse events; radiation safety assessments; and chemistry, manufacturing, and controls. The content and format of an application for approval of a new drug are set forth in § 314.50 (21 CFR 314.50) and have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. This information collection supports part 315, which is currently approved under OMB control number 0910-0409.

In table 1, row 1, we estimate the annual reporting burden for preparing the safety and effectiveness sections of an application. This estimate does not include the time needed to conduct studies and clinical trials or other research from which the reported information is obtained.

Based on past submissions of human drug applications, new indication supplements for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals, or both, we estimate that six submissions will be received annually and that 2,000 hours would be spent preparing the portions of the application that would be affected by this information collection. We further estimate the total time needed to prepare complete applications for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals as approximately 12,000 hours. This information collection does not impose any additional reporting burden for safety and effectiveness information on diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals beyond the estimated burden of 2,000 hours, because safety and effectiveness information is already required in § 314.50 and has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. In fact, clarification of our criteria for the evaluation of diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals in this information collection is intended to streamline overall information collection burdens, particularly for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals that may have well-established, low-risk safety profiles by enabling manufacturers to tailor information submissions and avoid unnecessary clinical studies.

In table 1, row 2, we estimate the annual reporting burden for preparing the safety and effectiveness sections of a supplement to an approved application. This estimate does not include the time needed to conduct studies and clinical trials or other research from which the reported information is obtained.

Based on past submissions of human drug applications, new indication supplements for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals, or both, we estimate that nine submissions will be received annually. We estimate the total time needed to prepare complete applications for supplements to new applications for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals as approximately between 500 and 1,000 hours. We calculated the median of this estimate to arrive at approximately 750 hours. We further estimate that the total time needed to prepare the portions of the application that would be affected by this information collection as 6,750. As previously stated, this information collection does not impose any additional reporting burden for safety and effectiveness information on diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals beyond the estimated burden of 750 hours, because safety and effectiveness information is already required in § 314.50 and has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001.

In the Federal Register of November 12, 2020 (85 FR 71923), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Our estimated burden for the information collection reflects an overall increase of 13 responses with a corresponding increase of 14,750 burden hours, including submissions involving NDAs. We attribute this adjustment to an increase in the number of submissions for NDAs for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals we received over the past few years and because we are now capturing supplements to approved NDAs for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals.

In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

This information collection supports Agency regulations. Under section 413(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 350b(a)), the manufacturer or distributor of a new dietary ingredient (NDI), or of the dietary supplement that contains the NDI, must submit a premarket notification to FDA (as delegate for the Secretary of Health and Human Services) at least 75 days before introducing the product into interstate commerce or delivering it for introduction into interstate commerce, unless the NDI and any other dietary ingredients in the dietary supplement “have been present in the food supply as an article used for food in a form in which the food has not been chemically altered” (21 U.S.C. 350b(a)(1)). The notification must contain the information which provides the basis on which the manufacturer or distributor of the NDI or dietary supplement has concluded that the dietary supplement containing the NDI will reasonably be expected to be safe (21 U.S.C. 350b(a)(2)).

FDA's implementing regulation, § 190.6 (21 CFR 190.6), specifies the procedure for submitting a premarket NDI notification and the information the manufacturer or distributor must include in the notification. Under § 190.6(b), the notification must include the following: (1) The name and complete address of the manufacturer or distributor; (2) the name of the NDI; (3) a description of the dietary supplement(s) that contains the NDI, including the level of the NDI in the dietary supplement and the conditions of use recommended or suggested in the labeling of the dietary supplement, or if no conditions of use are recommended or suggested in the supplement's labeling, the ordinary conditions of use of the supplement; (4) the history of use or other evidence of safety establishing that the NDI will reasonably be expected to be safe when used under the conditions recommended or suggested in the labeling of the dietary supplement; and (5) the signature of a responsible person designated by the manufacturer or distributor.

These premarket notification requirements are designed to enable us to monitor the introduction into the marketplace of NDIs and dietary supplements that contain NDIs in order to protect consumers from ingredients and products whose safety is unknown. We use the information collected in NDI notifications to evaluate the safety of NDIs in dietary supplements and to support regulatory action against ingredients and products that are potentially unsafe.

FDA developed an electronic portal (Form FDA 3880) that respondents may use to electronically submit their notifications to us via the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) Online Submission Module (COSM). COSM was developed to assist respondents when filing regulatory submissions and is specifically designed to aid users wishing to file submissions with CFSAN. COSM allows safety and other information to be uploaded and submitted online via Form FDA 3880. This form provides a standard format to describe the history of use or other evidence of safety on which the manufacturer or distributor bases its conclusion that the NDI is reasonably expected to be safe under the conditions of use recommended or suggested in the labeling of the dietary supplement, as well as a description of the ingredient and other information. Firms that prefer to submit a paper notification in a format of their own choosing have the option to do so; however, Form FDA 3880 prompts a submitter to input the elements of an NDI notification in a standard format that we will be able to review efficiently. Form FDA 3880 may be accessed at https://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/NewDietaryIngredientsNotificationProcess/default.htm.

Description of Respondents: The respondents to this collection of information are certain manufacturers and distributors in the dietary supplement industry.

In the Federal Register of October 16, 2020 (85 FR 65830), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. A number of comments were received expressing general interest in labeling requirements applicable to dietary supplements. Other comments were received pertaining to related Agency draft guidance, one suggesting that FDA: (1) Failed to account for the cost of removing from the market dietary supplements suddenly deemed New Dietary Ingredients for the first time in the guidance; (2) substantially underestimated the number and cost of New Dietary Ingredient submissions that must be filed to comply with the guidance; and (3) grossly and dangerously undervalued the economic impact the guidance will have on the dietary supplement industry and the economy as a whole.

While we appreciate all feedback regarding Agency information collection activities, as we communicated in our notice of March 28, 2018 (83 FR 13281), the data analysis offered by the comment does not provide a basis upon which we can revise our burden estimate under the PRA. Regulatory requirements regarding premarket notification for new dietary ingredients are set forth under 21 CFR 190.6 and were established by final rule of September 23, 1997 (62 FR 49886). Notices published in the Federal Register in compliance with the PRA seek to improve information collection activities by evaluating our need for the information discussed in the notice and specific ways we might utilize technology and/or enhance our collection techniques and mechanisms to minimize burden on respondents who are subject to applicable those requirements. Finally, notices of availability for Agency guidance documents are published consistent with regulations in 21 CFR 10.115 (Good Guidance Practices), which provide for public comment at any time.

We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

I. Background

Section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335a(a)(2)(B)) requires debarment of an individual from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug product application if FDA finds that the individual has been convicted of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of any drug product under the FD&C Act. On March 28, 2019, Mr. Reinhard entered a plea of guilty to one count of engaging in unlicensed wholesale distribution of prescription drugs in violation of sections 301(t), 303(b)(1)(D), and 503(e)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 331(t), 333(b)(1)(D), and 353(e)(1)(A)) and (18 U.S.C. 2), a felony offense under Federal law. On January 16, 2020, judgment of conviction was entered against Mr. Reinhard for this felony offense in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Louisville Division.

The factual basis for this conviction is as follows: Mr. Reinhard was a pharmacist residing in the State of West Virginia and was employed by Meds 2 Go Express Pharmacy, Inc. (Meds 2 Go Express). From November 2010 through at least August 2012, he aided and abetted others, through Meds 2 Go Express, by engaging in unlicensed wholesale distribution of Tramadol from West Virginia to Alabama through Kentucky. Specifically, Mr. Reinhard aided and abetted individuals who combined, conspired, confederated, and agreed to engage in a scheme to sell, distribute, and dispense prescription drugs over the internet and to deliver those prescription drugs to customers, without the issuance of valid prescriptions. Under this scheme, customers would order prescription drugs from websites without ever seeing or speaking to a physician or medical practitioner. On the website, customers chose which prescription drugs they wished to order, and completed an online medical questionnaire with prepopulated answers that did not disqualify the customers from receiving the prescription drugs that they ordered. The website operator would then send the completed online medical questionnaires to doctors or individuals posing as doctors, who issued the prescriptions requested by the customers without first conducting an in-person medical examination, speaking with the customers, reviewing the customers' medical records, or otherwise verifying any of the information provided by the customer. These invalid prescriptions were issued outside of the usual course of professional practice and were not for a legitimate medical purpose. The website operators would then send the issued prescription by electronic means to pharmacies, including Meds 2 Go Express, to be filled. After filling a prescription, Meds 2 Go Express and other pharmacies would send the prescription drugs to the customers, who often were not in the same State as the pharmacy, via the U.S. Postal Service or other delivery methods. It was found that Mr. Reinhard distributed the prescription drug Tramadol from West Virginia to a wholesale fulfillment pharmacy located in Alabama through Kentucky in violation of Federal law. Tramadol, as contained in the drug product ULTRAM and generic formulations, is a prescription painkiller that may induce psychic and physical dependence.

Based on this conviction, FDA sent Mr. Reinhard by certified mail on October 5, 2020, a notice proposing to permanently debar him from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug product application. The proposal was based on a finding, under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act, that Mr. Reinhard was convicted, as set forth in section 306( l )(1) of the FD&C Act, of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of a drug product under the FD&C Act. The proposal also offered Mr. Reinhard an opportunity to request a hearing, providing him 30 days from the date of receipt of the letter in which to file the request, and advised him that failure to file a timely request for a hearing would constitute an election not to use the opportunity for a hearing and a waiver of any contentions concerning this action. Mr. Reinhard received the proposal on October 10, 2020. He did not request a hearing within the timeframe prescribed by regulation and has, therefore, waived his opportunity for a hearing and any contentions concerning his debarment (21 CFR part 12).

Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Office of Human and Animal Food Operations, under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act, under authority delegated to the Assistant Commissioner, finds that Mr. Reinhard has been convicted of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of a drug product under the FD&C Act.

As a result of the foregoing finding, Mr. Reinhard is permanently debarred from providing services in any capacity to a person with an approved or pending drug product application, effective (see DATES ) (see sections 306(a)(2)(B) and (c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FD&C Act). Any person with an approved or pending drug product application who knowingly employs or retains as a consultant or contractor, or otherwise uses in any capacity the services of Mr. Reinhard during his debarment, will be subject to civil money penalties (section 307(a)(6) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335b(a)(6))). If Mr. Reinhard provides services in any capacity to a person with an approved or pending drug product application during his period of debarment, he will be subject to civil money penalties (section 307(a)(7) of the FD&C Act). In addition, FDA will not accept or review any abbreviated new drug application from Mr. Reinhard during his period of debarment, other than in connection with an audit under section 306 of the FD&C Act (section 306(c)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act). Note that, for purposes of sections 306 and 307 of the FD&C Act, a “drug product” is defined as a drug subject to regulation under section 505, 512, or 802 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355, 360b, or 382) or under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262) (section 201(dd) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(dd))).

Any application by Mr. Reinhard for special termination of debarment under section 306(d)(4) of the FD&C Act should be identified with Docket No. FDA-2020-N-1565 and sent to the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES ). The public availability of information in these submissions is governed by 21 CFR 10.20.

Publicly available submissions will be placed in the docket and will be viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES ) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-402-7500.

Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

Title of the Collection: The Protection of Human Subjects: Assurance Identification/IRB Certification/Declaration of Exemption Form.

Type of Collection: Extension.

OMB No. 0990-0263 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office for Human Research Protections.

Abstract: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office for Human Research Protections is requesting a three-year extension of the Protection of Human Subjects: Assurance Identification/IRB Certification/Declaration of Exemption Form, OMB No. 0990-0263.

The information collected on the form is to provide a simplified procedure for institutions engaged in research conducted or supported by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to satisfy the requirements of HHS regulations for the protection of human subjects at 45 CFR 46.103 for assurance identification and IRB certification and declare exemption status.

Likely Respondents: Institutions engaged in research involving human subjects where the research is supported by HHS. Institutional use of the form is also relied upon by other federal departments and agencies that have codified or follow the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (Common Rule), which is codified for HHS at 45 CFR part 46, subpart A.

Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

Title of the Collection: Protection of Human Subjects: Assurance of Compliance with Federal Policy/IRB Review/IRB Recordkeeping/Informed Consent/Consent Documentation.

Type of Collection: Extension.

Abstract: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office for Human Research Protections is requesting a three-year extension of the Protection of Human Subjects: Assurance of Compliance with Federal Policy/IRB Review/IRB Recordkeeping/Informed Consent/Consent Documentation, OMB No. 0990-0260.

Information reported to the Federal departments and agencies under the Common Rule with respect to a satisfactory assurance is used to ensure that an institution engaged in non-exempt research involving human subjects conducted or supported by a Common Rule department or agency has (1) established adequate administrative policies and procedures for protecting the rights and welfare of human subjects in research, and (2) accepts that responsibility. Other reporting requirements are used to: Assess whether the institution is following the established procedures; ensure that Federal funds are not expended for unapproved human subjects research; and, determine if the approved status of an awarded grant, contract, or cooperative agreement should be reviewed, with the ultimate goal of maintaining or increasing human subject protections.

Likely Respondents: Institutions, institutional review boards and investigators.

The AFG Program awards grants directly to fire departments, non-affiliated emergency medical services (EMS) organizations, and State Fire Training Academies (SFTAs) for the purpose of enhancing the health and safety of first responders and improving their abilities to protect the public from fire and fire-related hazards.

Applications for the FY 2020 AFG Program were submitted and processed online at https://go.fema.gov. Before the application period started, the FY 2020 AFG Program Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was published on FEMA's AFG Program website. The AFG Program website provides additional information and materials useful for FY 2020 AFG Program applicants including Frequently Asked Questions, Application Checklist, Get Ready Guide Narrative, Self-Evaluation Sheets for Vehicle Acquisition and Operations Safety, and a Cost Share Calculator. Based on past AFG Program application periods, FEMA anticipates receiving 10,000 to 15,000 applications for the FY 2020 AFG Program, and the ability to award approximately 2,000 grants.

For the FY 2020 AFG Program, Congress appropriated $355 million (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Pub. L. 116-93). From this amount, $319.5 million will be made available for FY 2020 AFG Program awards. In addition, Section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, as amended (15 U.S.C. 2229), requires that a minimum of 10 percent of available funds be expended for Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S) Program grants. FP&S Program awards will be made directly to local fire departments and to local, regional, State, or national entities recognized for their expertise in the fields of fire prevention and firefighter safety research and development. Funds appropriated for FY 2020 will be available for obligation and award until September 30, 2021.

The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 further directs FEMA to administer these appropriations according to the following requirements:

• Career fire departments: Not less than 25 percent of available grant funds.

• Volunteer fire departments: Not less than 25 percent of available grant funds.

• Combination fire departments and departments using paid-on-call firefighting personnel: Not less than 25 percent of available grant funds.

• Open competition (career, volunteer, and/or combination fire departments and departments using paid-on-call firefighting personnel): Not less than 10 percent of available grant funds awarded.

• EMS providers including fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations: Not less than 3.5 percent of available grant funds awarded, with nonaffiliated EMS providers receiving no more than 2 percent of the total available grant funds.

• SFTAs: Not more than 3 percent of available grant funds shall be collectively awarded to SFTA applicants, with a maximum of $1 million per applicant.

• Vehicles: Not more than 25 percent of available grant funds may be used for the purchase of vehicles; 10 percent of those vehicle funds will be dedicated to the funding of ambulances. Vehicle funds will be distributed as equally as possible among urban, suburban, and rural community applicants.

• Micro grants: This is a voluntary funding limitation choice made by the applicant for requests submitted within the operations and safety activity; it is not an additional funding opportunity. Micro grants are awards that have a Federal participation (share) that does not exceed $50,000. Only fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations are eligible to choose micro grants, and the only eligible micro grants requests are for training, equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE), and wellness and fitness activities. Applicants that select micro grants as a funding opportunity may receive additional consideration for award. If an applicant selects micro grants in their application, they will be limited in the total amount of funding their organization can be awarded; if they are requesting funding in excess of $50,000 Federal participation, they should not select micro grants.

Since 2001, the AFG Program has helped firefighters and other first responders obtain critically needed equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training, and other resources needed to protect emergency personnel and the public from fire and related hazards. FEMA awards grants on a competitive basis to the applicants that best address the AFG Program's priorities and provide the most compelling justification. Applications that best address AFG Program priorities, as identified in the Application Evaluation Criteria, will be reviewed by a peer review panel composed of fire service personnel.

The AFG Program has three program activities:

The priorities for each activity are fully outlined in the NOFO.

Prior to making a grant award, FEMA is required by 31 U.S.C. 3354, as amended by the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, Public Law 116-117 (2020), 41 U.S.C. 2313, and 2 CFR 200.206 to review information available through any Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated repositories of government-wide eligibility qualification or financial integrity information. Therefore, application evaluation criteria may include the following risk-based considerations of the applicant: (1) Financial stability; (2) quality of management systems and ability to meet management standards; (3) history of performance in managing Federal awards; (4) reports and findings from audits; and (5) ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements.

FEMA will rank all complete and submitted applications based on how well they match program priorities for the type of jurisdiction(s) served. Answers to activity specific questions provide information used to determine each application's ranking relative to the stated program priorities.

Funding priorities and criteria for evaluating AFG Program applications are established by FEMA based on the recommendations from the Criteria Development Panel (CDP). CDP is comprised of fire service professionals who make recommendations to FEMA regarding the creation of new, or the modification of previously established, funding priorities, as well as developing criteria for awarding grants. The content of the NOFO reflects implementation of CDP's recommendations with respect to the priorities and evaluation criteria for awards.

The nine major fire service organizations represented on the CDP are:

AFG Program applications are reviewed through a multi-phase process. All applications are electronically pre-scored and ranked based on how well they align with the funding priorities outlined in this notice. Applications with the highest pre-score rankings are then scored competitively by (no less than three) members of a Peer Review Panel. Applications will also be evaluated through a series of internal FEMA review processes for completeness, adherence to programmatic guidelines, technical feasibility, and anticipated effectiveness of the proposed project(s). Below is the process by which applications will be reviewed:

The application undergoes an electronic pre-scoring process based on established program priorities listed within the NOFO and answers to activity specific questions within the online application. Application narratives are not reviewed during pre-scoring. Request details and budget information should comply with program guidance and statutory funding limitations. The pre-score is 50 percent of the total application score.

Applications with the highest pre-score will undergo peer review. The peer review is comprised of fire service representatives recommended by the organizations represented on the CDP. The panelists assess the merits of each application based on the narrative section of the application, including the evaluation elements listed in the Narrative Evaluation Criteria below. Panelists independently score each project within the application, discuss the merits and/or shortcomings of the application with their peers, and document the findings. A consensus is not required. The panel score is 50 percent of the total application score.

The highest ranked applications are considered within the fundable range. Applications that are in the fundable range undergo both a technical review by a subject matter expert, as well as a FEMA AFG Branch review prior to being recommended for an award. The FEMA AFG Branch will assess the request with respect to costs, quantities, feasibility, eligibility, and recipient responsibility prior to recommending an application for award. Once the technical evaluation process is complete, the cumulative score for each application will be determined and FEMA will generate a final ranking of applications. FEMA will award grants based on this final ranking and the statutorily required funding limitations listed in this notice and the NOFO.

Applicants should describe their financial need and how consistent it is with the intent of the AFG Program. This statement should include details describing the applicant's financial distress, summarized budget constraints, unsuccessful attempts to secure other funding, and proof that their financial distress is out of their control.

This statement should clearly explain the applicant's project objectives and the relationship between those objectives and the applicant's budget and risk analysis. The applicant should describe the activities, including program priorities or facility modifications, ensuring consistency with project objectives, the applicant's mission, and any national, State, and/or local requirements. Applicants should link the proposed expenses to operations and safety, as well as the completion of the project goals.

Applicants should describe how they plan to address the operations and personal safety needs of their organization, including cost effectiveness and sharing assets. This statement should also include details about gaining the maximum benefits from grant funding by citing reasonable or required costs, such as specific overhead and administrative costs. The applicant's request should also be consistent with their mission and identify how funding will benefit their organization and personnel.

This statement should explain how these funds will enhance the applicant's overall effectiveness. It should address how an award will improve daily operations and reduce the applicant's risks. Applicants should include how frequently the requested items will be used, and in what capacity. Applicants should also indicate how the requested items will help the community and increase the organization's ability to save additional lives or property. Jurisdictions that demonstrate their commitment and proactive posture to reducing fire risk, by explaining their code enforcement (to include Wildland Urban Interface code enforcement) and mitigation strategies (including whether or not the jurisdiction has a FEMA-approved mitigation strategy) may receive stronger consideration under this criterion.

Fire Departments: Fire departments operating in any of the 50 States, as well as fire departments in the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any federally-recognized Indian Tribe or Tribal organization.

A fire department is an agency or organization having a formally recognized arrangement with a State, territory, local, or Tribal authority (city, county, parish, fire district, township, town, or other governing body) to provide fire suppression to a population within a geographically fixed primary first due response area.

Nonaffiliated EMS organizations: Nonaffiliated EMS organizations operating in any of the 50 States, as well as the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any federally-recognized Indian Tribe or Tribal organization.

A nonaffiliated EMS organization is an agency or organization that is a public or private nonprofit emergency medical services entity providing medical transport that is not affiliated with a hospital and does not serve a geographic area in which emergency medical services are adequately provided by a fire department.

FEMA considers the following as hospitals under the AFG Program:

State Fire Training Academies: SFTAs operating in any of the 50 States, as well as the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Applicants must be designated either by legislation or by a Governor's declaration as the sole fire service training agency within a State, territory, or the District of Columbia. The designated SFTA shall be the only agency/bureau/division, or entity within that State, territory, or the District of Columbia.

• To avoid a duplication of benefits, FEMA reserves the right to review all program activities or grant applications where two or more organizations share a single facility. To be eligible as a separate organization, two or more fire departments or nonaffiliated EMS organizations will have different funding streams, personnel rosters, or Employer Identification Numbers (EINs). If two or more organizations share facilities and each submits an application in the same program area ( e.g., Equipment, Modify Facilities, PPE, Training, and/or Wellness and Fitness Programs) FEMA will carefully review each program for eligibility.

• Fire-based EMS organizations are not eligible to apply as nonaffiliated EMS organizations. Fire-based EMS training and equipment must be requested by a fire department under the AFG Program component program of Operations and Safety.

• Eligible applicants may submit only one application for each activity ( e.g., Operations and Safety, Regional, etc.), but may submit for multiple projects within each activity. Under the Vehicle Activity, applicants may submit one application for vehicles for their department and one separate application to host a Regional vehicle. Duplicate applications (more than one application in the same activity) may be disqualified.

• An Operations and Safety applicant may submit one application for an eligible project (i e.g., turn out gear); it may not submit a Regional application for the same project.

• Congress has enacted statutory limits to the amount of funding that a grant recipient may receive from the AFG Program in any single fiscal year based on the population served (15 U.S.C. 2229(c)(2)). Awards will be limited based on the size of the population protected by the applicant, as indicated below. Notwithstanding the annual limits stated below, the Administrator of FEMA may not award a grant in an amount that exceeds one percent of the available grant funds in such fiscal year, except where it is determined that such recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant in an amount that exceeds the one percent aggregate limit.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with 100,000 people or fewer, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $1 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 100,000 people, but not more than 500,000 people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $2 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 500,000, but not more than 1 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $3 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 1 million people but not more than 2.5 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient is subject to the one percent aggregate cap of $3.55 million for FY 2020, but FEMA may waive this aggregate cap in individual cases where FEMA determines that a recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant that exceeds the aggregate cap; if FEMA waives the aggregate cap, the amount of grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $6 million for any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 2.5 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient is subject to the one percent aggregate cap of $3.55 million for FY 2020, but FEMA may waive this aggregate cap in individual cases where FEMA determines that a recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant that exceeds the aggregate cap; if FEMA waives the aggregate cap, the amount of grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $9 million for any fiscal year.

• FEMA may not waive the population-based limits on the amount of grant funds awarded as set by 15 U.S.C. 2229(c)(2)(A).

The cumulative total of the Federal share of awards in Operations and Safety, Regional, and Vehicle Acquisition activities will be considered when assessing award amounts and any limitations thereto. Applicants may request funding up to the statutory limit on each of their applications.

For example, an applicant that serves a jurisdiction with more than 100,000 people, but not more than 500,000 people, may request up to $2 million on their Operations and Safety Application, and up to $2 million on their Vehicle Acquisition request. However, should both grants be awarded, the applicant would have to choose which award to accept if the cumulative value of both applications exceeds the statutory limits.

Grant recipients must share in the costs of the projects funded under this grant program as required by 15 U.S.C. 2229(k)(1) and in accordance with applicable Federal regulations at 2 CFR part 200, but they are not required to have the cost-share at the time of application nor at the time of award. However, before a grant is awarded, FEMA validates that the grant recipient has provided sufficient evidence that the cost-share requirement will be fulfilled during the period of the grant award.

In general, an eligible applicant seeking a grant shall agree to make available non-Federal funds equal to not less than 15 percent of the grant awarded. However, the cost share will vary as follows based on the size of the population served by the organization, with exceptions to this general requirement for entities serving smaller communities:

• Applicants that serve populations of 20,000 or less shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 5 percent of the grant awarded.

• Applicants serving areas with populations above 20,000, but not more than 1 million, shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 10 percent of the grant awarded.

• Applicants serving areas with populations above 1 million shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 15 percent of the grant awarded.

The cost share for SFTAs will apply the requirements above based on the total population of the State.

The cost share for a regional application will apply the requirements above based on the aggregate population of the primary first due response areas of the host and participating partner organizations that execute a Memorandum of Understanding as described in Appendix B, Section J, Regional projects, of the FY 2020 AFG Program NOFO.

On a case-by-case basis, FEMA may allow a grant recipient that may already own assets (equipment or vehicles), acquired with non-Federal cash, to use the trade-in allowance/credit value of those assets as “cash” for the purpose of meeting the cost-share obligation of their AFG Program award. In-kind, cost-share matches are not allowed.

Grant recipients under this grant program must also agree to a maintenance of effort requirement as required by 15 U.S.C. 2229(k)(3) (referred to as a “maintenance of expenditure” requirement in that statute). A grant recipient shall agree to maintain during the term of the grant the applicant's aggregate expenditures relating to the activities allowable under the NOFO at not less than 80 percent of the average amount of such expenditures in the two fiscal years preceding the fiscal year in which the grant amounts are received.

In cases of demonstrated economic hardship, and at the request of the grant recipient, the Administrator of FEMA may waive or reduce a grant recipient's cost share requirement or maintenance of expenditure requirement. AFG Program applicants for FY 2020 must indicate at the time of application whether they are requesting a waiver and whether the waiver is for the cost share requirement, for the maintenance of effort requirement, or both. As required by statute, the Administrator of FEMA is required to establish guidelines for determining what constitutes economic hardship. FEMA has published these guidelines at FEMA's website: https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/Eco_Hardship_Waiver_FPS_SAFER_AFG_IB_FINAL.pdf.

Prior to the start of the FY 2020 AFG Program application period, FEMA conducted applicant internet webinars to inform potential applicants about the AFG Program. In addition, FEMA provided applicants with information at the AFG Program website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/firefighters to help them prepare quality grant applications. The AFG Program Help Desk is staffed throughout the application period to assist applicants with the automated application process as well as assistance with any questions.

Applicants can reach the AFG Program Help Desk through a toll-free telephone number during normal business hours (1-866-274-0960) or electronic mail firegrants@fema.dhs.gov.

Organizations may submit one application per application period in each of the three AFG Program activities ( e.g., one application for Operations and Safety, one for Vehicle Acquisition, and/or a separate application to be a Joint/Regional Project host). If an organization submits more than one application for any single AFG Program activity ( e.g., two applications for Operations and Safety, two for Vehicles, etc.), either intentionally or unintentionally, both applications may be disqualified.

Applicants accessed the grant application electronically at https://go.fema.gov. The application is also accessible from the U.S. Fire Administration's website http://www.usfa.fema.gov and http://www.grants.gov. New applicants must register and establish a user name and password for secure access to the grant application. Previous AFG Program applicants must use their previously established user name and passwords.

Applicants are expected to answer questions about their grant request that reflect the AFG Program funding priorities, described below. In addition, each applicant must complete four separate narratives for each project or grant activity requested. Grant applicants will also provide relevant information about their organization's characteristics, call volume, and existing organizational capabilities.

Per 2 CFR 25.200, all Federal grant applicants and recipients must register at https://SAM.gov. SAM is the Federal Government's System for Awards Management, and registration is free of charge. Applicants must maintain current information in SAM that is consistent with the data provided in their AFG Program grant application and in the Dun & Bradstreet (DUNS) database. FEMA may not accept any application, process any awards, or consider any payment or amendment requests, unless the applicant or grant recipient has complied with the requirements to provide a valid DUNS number and an active SAM registration. The grant applicant's banking information, EIN, organization/entity name, address, and DUNS number must match the same information provided in SAM.

If there are any differences between the published AFG Program guidelines and the recommendations made by the CDP, FEMA must explain them and publish the information in the Federal Register prior to awarding any grant under the AFG Program. For FY 2020, FEMA accepted, and will implement, all but two of the CDP's recommendations for the prioritization of eligible activities.

The FY 2020 AFG Program NOFO contains some changes to definitions, descriptions, and priority categories. Changes to the FY 2020 AFG Program NOFO include:

• Under Sections D—Application and Submission Information, E—Application Review Information, F—Federal Award Administration Information, G—DHS Awarding Agency Contact and Resource. Information, and H—Additional Information:

○ Various grants management changes due to the recent OMB revision to 2 CFR In particular, changes regarding SAM registration, performance measures, procurement, closeout, and termination are included.

• Under Federal Award Information:

○ Period of performance for AFG Program awards is 24 months.

• Under Supporting Definitions:

○ Paid on-call/Stipend departments are added to the definition for Combination Fire Department.

• Under Application Tips:

○ Explanation of AFG Program-approved seated riding positions was added.

• Under Training Activity:

○ Rental of Audio/Visual equipment was added as eligible activity.

• Under Operations and Safety Activity:

○ Radio over internet Protocol (RoIP) communication equipment was added as a Medium Priority.

○ Integrated thermal imaging cameras were added to the ineligible list under the PPE category.

• Under Modifications to Facility Activity:

○ Intruder alerting systems and deployment notification systems were added as ineligible.

• Under Regional Applications:

○ Guidance requiring purchases from same vendor added.

• Under Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP):

○ Updated process for EHP added.

• Under Award Administration Information (Appendix C):

○ Updated process for Economic Hardship Waiver added.

○ Excess Funds Restrictions specifies High Priority items as eligible under this option.

○ Updated instruction on supporting documentation is added for advance and reimbursement payment request.

• The CDP recommended that fire departments implement a requirement where National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards listed as 1582 physicals become a requirement for all awards. FEMA recommends evaluating the impact of this requirement prior to implementation. Data on fire departments' abilities to meet this standard was collected in the FY 2020 application. It will not be considered during the application review.

• The CDP recommended that FEMA adopt new definitions for career and combination departments to align with NFPA changes in the 1710 and 1720 standards. FEMA is unable to adopt this recommendation as it conflicts with statutory definitions.

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), make available the Renewable (Wind and Solar) Energy, Power Line, and Communication Tower Habitat Conservation Plan for the Lesser Prairie-chicken; Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas (HCP). The LPC Conservation LLC (applicant) has applied for an incidental take permit (ITP). If approved, the requested ITP would become effective and authorize incidental take of the lesser prairie-chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus; LEPC) should the LEPC become federally listed during the life of the ITP and HCP under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ).

We are considering issuing a section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP for the LEPC, a species that is not currently listed under the ESA, in response to the applicant's application and supporting HCP. While our 2016 revised HCP handbook (Handbook) provides guidance that an ITP and supporting HCP include at least one ESA-listed animal species, the issuance of this ITP could provide for LEPC conservation in several ways. First, the proposed HCP may meet the Service's conservation recommendation for the LEPC because it emphasizes avoidance and minimization, and focuses mitigation in areas that can serve as conservation strongholds for this species. Depending on enrollment, this mitigation strategy could help to preclude the need to list the LEPC or could help to recover the LEPC, if listing is warranted in the future. Second, the proposed HCP would provide taxpayer and industry savings in the use of one conservation planning strategy. In contrast, developing a CCAA prior to a future listing and developing an HCP, or multiple HCPs, after a potential future listing is inefficient for both the Federal agencies and industry participants. The proposed HCP would be more efficient because potential participants could enroll on a project-by-project basis either pre- or post a future listing. This allows for greater, more consistent, and more predictable conservation efforts to be undertaken. Third, with this proposed HCP, the Service would issue a permit that does not go into effect until a future listing, if it occurs. This is the same as our practice for permits associated with CCAAs and ITPs associated with multi-species HCPs that include unlisted species. Finally, the proposed HCP also supports States' management ability of the unlisted species similar to CCAAs in that the proposed ITP does not become effective until such time that the covered species may be listed. Prelisting participation is voluntary for participants and provides the affected States continued regulatory authority regarding wildlife species.

We believe considering a HCP without a currently listed species, in this instance, is supported by the Conference Report to the 1982 Amendments that created HCPs (Conference Report) which expressly considered both listed and unlisted species, H.R. Rep No. 97-835, at 30 (1982). The Conference Report states that “although the conservation plan is keyed to the permit provisions of the Act which only apply to listed species, the committee intends that conservation plans may address both listed and unlisted species.” Id. The Conference Report continues by stating that the inclusion of unlisted species supports the Congressional purpose that the species not be viewed in isolation but in terms of their relationship to the ecosystem as a whole. This broad view of conservation, including conservation planning and permitting for unlisted species, is “consistent with the purposes of several other fish and wildlife statutes (e.g, Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) which are intended to authorize the Secretary to cooperate with the States and private entities on matters regarding conservation of all fish and wildlife resources of this nation.” Id. The Conference Report encourages the Secretary to develop “creative partnerships between the public and private sectors” and notes that the Secretary “may utilize this provision to approve conservation plans which provide long-term commitments regarding the conservation of listed as well as unlisted species.” Id.

Through the proposed minimization and mitigation measures, the HCP would provide long-term commitments regarding the conservation of LEPC that would fully offset impacts to the species associated with habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from implementation of the covered activities by participants in the HCP. The HCP would provide voluntary pre-listing conservation that may be used to evaluate the species' status in a future listing decision, and potential participants would have the option to enroll in the HCP prior to or after a potential future listing decision. As such, processing the ITP application and HCP under 10(a)(1)(B) could provide for long-term conservation for the LEPC and more flexibility and long-term regulatory certainty for participants, as described above.

Based on the information above, we have determined that processing this ITP application and HCP is consistent with the Conference Report and current regulations, and, therefore, we may process this ITP application and HCP under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22(b) and 17.32(b)).

In accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), we advise the public that:

1. We have prepared a draft environmental assessment (EA) to evaluate the ITP application. We are accepting comments on the ITP application and draft EA.

2. The applicant has developed an HCP which describes the measures the applicant has volunteered to take to meet the issuance criteria for a 10(a)(1)(B) ITP associated with an HCP. The issuance criteria for HCPs are found at 50 CFR 17.22(b)(2) and 50 CFR 17.32(b)(2).

3. The HCP would be implemented by those parties who voluntarily enroll, providing conservation upon enrollment, but the subject ITP would not be effective until such time as the cover species may be listed in the future. The ITP would be effective only for those participants fully implementing the conservation plan.

4. As described in the HCP, the potential incidental take of LEPC could result from otherwise lawful, voluntary activities covered by the HCP.

5. We have included the alternative of issuing an enhancement of survival permit (ESP) under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA, the Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances Policy, and implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22(d) and 17.32(d)), and we will accept comments related to this alternative.

Section 9 of the ESA and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 17 prohibit the “take” of fish or wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened. Take is defined under the ESA as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed animal species, or to attempt to engage in such conduct” (16 U.S.C. 1538(19)). However, under section 10(a) of the ESA, we may issue permits to authorize incidental take of listed species. “Incidental take” is defined by the ESA as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity.

Regulations governing such take of endangered and threatened species are found at 50 CFR 17.21-22 and 50 CFR 17.31-32, respectively.

The proposed action involves the issuance of a 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit (ITP) to LPC Conservation LLC (applicant) and approval of the proposed Renewable (Wind and Solar) Energy, Power Line, and Communication Tower Habitat Conservation Plan for the Lesser Prairie-chicken; Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas (HCP). The ITP would cover incidental “take” of the LEPC associated with wind, solar, power line, and communication tower buildout, including ancillary ( e.g., access road, lay down yard, power line interconnection) ground-disturbing activities associated with these project types within the HCP permit area that could affect potentially suitable LEPC habitat (the “covered activities”). In addition, the covered activities include other ground disturbing activities which could occur during some types of repairs required during the operations and maintenance phase, project repowering, or project decommissioning within the permit area.

The requested term of the ITP is 30 years, and the ITP would authorize incidental take of LEPC associated with impacts to up to 500,000 acres of suitable LEPC habitat within the plan area (approximately 1.7 percent of the 30,178,085 total acres of potentially suitable LEPC habitat within the plan area) resulting from implementation of the covered activities by participants in the HCP.

To meet the requirements of a section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP, the applicant has developed, and proposes to implement, the HCP, which describes the conservation measures the applicant has voluntarily agreed to undertake. These measures will be implemented prior to or concurrent with proposed impacts. These measures include LEPC habitat conservation through enhancement and restoration. On average, for every acre of LEPC habitat impacted, 2 acres of perpetual LEPC habitat conservation would be required. Of those 2 acres, 1 acre would consist of restoration and the other acre would consist of enhancement. Restoration actions include removal of woody vegetation encroachment, removal infrastructure, and conversion of cropland to grasslands. Enhancement efforts primarily include actions to maintain or enhance the quality of existing LEPC habitat, such as prescribed burning, prescribed grazing, and chemical and mechanical manipulation of the vegetative community. Implementation of the proposed LEPC habitat conservation measures are projected to result in no net loss of LEPC habitat. The ITP would authorize incidental take that may result from the implementation of the proposed conservation measures, including activities occurring on mitigation parcels that, while providing a long-term benefit to LEPC, may have temporary impacts to the species.

The HCP, including the proposed conservation measures, was developed in coordination with the Service. Implementation of the HCP requirements, including the conservation measures, would be required for all participants in the HCP regardless of the listing status of the LEPC. The proposed conservation measures, once implemented, would fully offset impacts to the LEPC associated with habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from implementation of the covered activities, and would provide a long-term conservation benefit to LEPC.

We are considering two alternatives to the proposed action as part of this process: Issuance of an Enhancement of Survival Permit for a Candidate Conservation Agreement With Assurances, and a No Action Alternative.

Under this alternative, instead of approving the HCP and issuing an ITP, the Service would issue an enhancement of survival permit (ESP) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA, supported by a candidate conservation agreement with assurances (CCAA), to the applicant for incidental take associated with the covered activities in the CCAA. The proposed covered activities in the CCAA would be the same as those proposed in the HCP. The permit term for the ESP would be 30 years. Under this alternative, it is assumed the applicant (in the role of CCAA administrator) would require enrolled projects to implement all the avoidance, minimization, mitigation, monitoring, adaptive management, and reporting processes described in the HCP as part of the CCAA. It is anticipated that a similar level of wind, solar, power line, and communication tower development within the permit area would occur under an HCP or a CCAA for each project. However, the enrollment of projects under the CCAA would end upon the future date of a possible listing of the covered species; whereas, the HCP enrollment would continue for the duration of the permit. We anticipate that this alternative would result in the same level of potential impacts to LEPC and the same level of LEPC conservation as what is proposed in the HCP for those enrolled prior to listing, but projects after a potential listing would need to develop their own HCPs or find an alternative coverage for incidental take. This action would be consistent with existing Service guidance for conservation actions of unlisted species.

Under this alternative, the Service would not issue an ITP or an ESP, and therefore this programmatic permitting structure would not be available for willing participants. While the LEPC remains unlisted, potentially participating entities ( i.e., wind, solar, power line, and communication tower companies) would have little economic or legal incentive to voluntarily initiate the conservation or management activities that are proposed in the HCP to benefit the LEPC. Therefore, unless potentially participating entities voluntarily participate in another programmatic permitting option, should one be available, or voluntarily develop their own stand along permitting option, conservation measures above and beyond those directed by existing Federal, State, and local laws, policies, or regulations likely would not be implemented, and the LEPC would not gain additional protections and conservation benefits over what currently exists. On private lands, where the State or Federal government has no authority to protect or direct the management of LEPC habitat, LEPC conservation programs would be implemented entirely at the discretion of the landowners and private developers.

We will evaluate the permit application, HCP, associated documents, and comments we receive to determine whether the ITP application meets the requirements of ESA, NEPA, and implementing regulations, or whether the issuance of an ESP should be considered. If we determine that all requirements are met, we will approve the HCP and issue the ITP under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) to the applicant in accordance with the terms of the HCP and specific terms and conditions of the authorizing ITP. Alternatively, we could approve this plan as a CCAA and issue an ESP under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) and applicable regulations. We will consider comments on both the alternative and the denial of issuing a permit in our final decision. We will not make our final decision until after the 30-day comment period ends, and we have fully considered all comments received during the public comment period.

All comments we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Requests for copies of comments will be handled in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, NEPA, and Service and Department of the Interior policies and procedures. 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 can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.

We provide this notice under the authority of section 10(c) of the ESA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32) and NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

The WCWCD has not applied for more than the 6,400-acre limitation for recreation uses in a year (or 640 acres if a nonprofit corporation or association), or more than 640 acres for each of the programs involving public resources other than recreation.

The WCWCD submitted an application in compliance with the regulations at 43 CFR 2741.4(b). The lands examined and identified as suitable for lease or conveyance under the R&PP Act are legally described as:

The lands are not needed for any Federal purposes. The lease or conveyance of the lands for recreation or public purposes use conforms with the BLM St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan, approved in March 1999, and would be in the public's interest. The BLM analyzed the parcel in a site-specific Environmental Assessment, DOI-BLM-UT-C030-2012-0001-EA.

All interested parties will receive a copy of this notice once it is published in the Federal Register . A copy of this notice with information about this proposed realty action will be published in the newspaper of local circulation once a week for three consecutive weeks. The regulations at 43 CFR subpart 2741 addressing requirements and procedures for conveyances under the R&PP Act do not require a public meeting.

Upon publication of this notice in the Federal Register , the lands will be segregated from all other forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including locations under the mining laws, except for lease or conveyance under the R&PP Act and leasing under the mineral leasing laws.

The lease or conveyance of the land, when issued, will be subject to the following terms, conditions, and reservations:

1. A right-of-way thereon for ditches and canals constructed by the authority of the United States Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 391; 43 U.S.C. 945).

2. Provisions of the R&PP Act and to all applicable regulations of the Secretary of the Interior.

3. All mineral deposits in the land so patented, and the right to prospect for, mine, and remove such deposits from the same under applicable law and regulations as established by the Secretary of the Interior are reserved to the United States, together with all necessary access and exit rights.

4. Lease or conveyance of the parcel is subject to valid existing rights.

5. An appropriate indemnification clause protecting the United States from claims arising out of the lessee's/patentee's use, occupancy, or occupations on the leased/patented lands.

6. A limited reversionary provision stating the title shall revert to the United States upon a finding, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, that, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior or his/her delegate, the patentee or its successor attempts to transfer title to or control over the lands to another, the lands have been devoted to a use other than that for which the lands were conveyed, the lands have not been used for the purpose for which the lands were conveyed for a five-year period, or the patentee has failed to follow the approved development plan or management plan. No portion of the land shall under any circumstance revert to the United States if any such portion has been used for solid waste disposal, or for any other purpose, which may result in the disposal, placement, or release of any hazardous substance.

7. Any other reservations the authorized officer determines appropriate to ensure public access and proper management of Federal lands and interests therein.

Any adverse comments will be reviewed by the BLM Utah State Director or other authorized official of the Department of the Interior who may sustain, vacate, or modify this realty action. In the absence of any adverse comments, the classification will become effective on June 14, 2021. The lands will not be offered for lease or conveyance until after the classification becomes effective.

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 can 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.

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that the decision approving lands for conveyance to Eklutna, Inc., for the Native village of Eklutna, pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), notice of which was published in the Federal Register on September 9, 2015, 80 FR 54319, will be modified in accordance with the Settlement Agreement entered into by and between the State of Alaska, Eklutna, Inc., and the United States on April 11, 2017, as amended on April 22, 2020. The modifications will be made by issuance of a decision setting out the following changes:

1. Adding three (3) easements not listed in the decision of September 9, 2015, to those to be reserved to the United States pursuant to Sec. 17(b) of ANCSA in the subsequent conveyance document;

2. Redescribing four (4) easements listed in the decision of September 9, 2015, to be reserved to the United States pursuant to Sec. 17(b) of ANCSA in the subsequent conveyance document;

3. Updating the navigability language to reflect the Bureau of Land Management's June 2017 determination that the Knik River is navigable; and

4. Making a technical correction to the interests and requirements to which the subsequent conveyance of lands will be made subject.

Notice of the modified decision will also be published once a week, for four consecutive weeks, in the Anchorage Daily News.

Any party claiming a property interest in the lands affected by the changes made in the modified decision may appeal the decision in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4 within the following time limits:

1. Unknown parties, parties unable to be located after reasonable efforts have been expended to locate, parties who fail or refuse to sign their return receipt, and parties who receive a copy of the decision by regular mail which is not certified, return receipt requested, shall have until May 14, 2021 to file an appeal.

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4 shall be deemed to have waived their rights. Notices of appeal transmitted by facsimile will not be accepted as timely filed.

Except as modified, the decision of September 9, 2015, notice of which was given on September 9, 2015, is final.

The 15-member RAC provides recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM Nevada State Director, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in the RAC's area of jurisdiction.

Planned agenda topics include the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, Wild Horse & Burro, Recreation, Wildfire Updates/Use of Emergency Stabilization & Rehabilitation Projects/Funds, Grazing, Land Conveyances, Fallon Naval Withdrawal, Energy Projects, and District managers' updates. All RAC meetings are open to the public and will be streamed via the Zoom Webinar Platform. Individuals who plan to attend and need further information about the meetings or need special assistance such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations may contact Lisa Ross at the phone number or email address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Public Disclosure of Comments: Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, please be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 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.

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Roku, Inc. on April 8, 2021. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (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 televisions, remote controls, and components thereof. The complainant names as respondents: Universal Electronics, Inc. of Scottsdale, AZ; Gemstar Technology (Qinzhou) Co. Ltd. of China; Gemstar Technology (Yangzhou) Co. Ltd. of China; C.G. Development Ltd. of China; Universal Electronics BV of Netherlands; UEI Brasil Controles Remotos Ltda. of Brazil; CG México Remote Controls, S. de R.L. de C.V. of Mexico; LG Electronics Inc. of South Korea; LG Electronics USA, Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. of South Korea; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, NJ; Charter Communications, Inc. of Stamford, CT; Charter Communications Holdings, LLC of St. Louis, MO; Spectrum Management Holding Company, LLC of Stamford, CT; Altice USA, Inc. of Long Island City, NY; CSC Holdings, LLC d/b/a Optimum-Cablevision of Long Island City, NY; Cablevision Systems Corp. of Bethpage, NY; Cequel Communications, LLC d/b/a Suddenlink Communications of Long Island City, NY; and Wideopenwest, Inc. of Englewood, CO.

The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. No other submissions will be accepted, unless requested by the Commission. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3542”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures  1 ). Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov. ) No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel,  2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Celanese International Corporation, Celanese (Malta) Company 2 Limited and Celanese Sales U.S. Ltd. on April 8, 2021. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (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 high-potency sweeteners, processes for making same, and products containing same. The complainant names as respondents: Anhui Jinhe Industrial Co., Ltd. of China; Jinhe USA LLC of Chicago, IL; Agridient, Inc. of Farmington Hills, MI; Apura Ingredients Inc. of Chino, CA; Crossroad Ingredients of Fairfield, NJ; Hhoya USA Inc. of New York, NY; Ingredis US LLC of Plainsboro, NJ; NiuSource Inc. of Chino, CA; Prinova US LLC of Hanover Park, IL; Prosweetz Ingredients Incorporated d/b/a Panasource Ingredients Inc. of Edison, NJ; Suzhou-Chem Inc. of Wellesley, MA; and UMC Ingredients, LLC fka JRS International LLC of Lyndhurst, NJ. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. No other submissions will be accepted, unless requested by the Commission. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3543”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures  1 ). Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov. ) No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, 2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

On August 24, 2020, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Maxell, Ltd. (“Maxell”) of Japan. 85 FR 52153-54 (Aug. 24, 2020). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), based on the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain mobile electronic devices and laptop computers by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,203,517; 8,982,086 (“the '086 patent”); 7,199,821 (“the '821 patent”); 10,129,590 (“the '590 patent”); and 10,176,848 (“the '848 patent”). Id. at 52153. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. The notice of investigation named as respondent Apple Inc. (“Apple”) of Cupertino, California. Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”) is also named as a party. Id.

On February 24, 2021, the Commission determined to terminate the investigation as to the '848 patent based on withdrawal of the allegations in the complaint as to that patent. Order No. 9 (Feb. 9, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Feb. 24, 2021). On March 15, 2021, the Commission determined to terminate the investigation as to (i) claims 3 and 5-10 of the '590 patent, (ii) claim 3 of the '086 patent, (iii) all asserted claims of the '590 and '821 patents with respect to Apple's MacOS products only, and (iv) Apple's affirmative defense of lack of standing based on the private parties' withdrawal of their respective allegations in the complaint and answer as to those issues. Order No. 14 (Feb. 19, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Mar. 15, 2021).

On March 25, 2021, Maxell and Apple filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on settlement. That same day, OUII filed a response in support of the motion.

On March 29, 2021, the ALJ issued the subject ID granting the motion. The ID finds that the motion complies with the requirements of Commission Rule 210.21(b) (19 CFR 210.21(b)) and that “the public interest generally favors settlement to avoid needless litigation and to conserve public resources.” ID at 2. No petitions for review of the subject 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 April 9, 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).

The ubiquity, structure, and use of communication networks and computing systems have changed dramatically over the last decade. The technology trade-offs that have enabled these networks and systems are becoming increasingly more complex with convergence across computer systems (spanning mobile, edge, fog, and cloud computing, etc.), application accelerators, distributed systems, network stacks, wireless systems, and wired network domains, thereby decreasing the efficacy of traditional model-based approaches. As a result, researchers are increasingly relying on machine learning and other data-intensive techniques to lead the development of next-generation, high-performance networks and computer systems. This necessitates the availability of representative datasets that can inform such research. Furthermore, representative datasets will enable the Networking Technology and Systems (NeTS) and Computer Systems Research (CSR) communities to contribute to innovations in Advanced Wireless and Artificial Intelligence, both of which have been identified as strategic priority areas for the Nation.

Addressing current and future research areas may require access to specific types of datasets that capture a broad range of practical settings and navigate through a complex set of design trade-offs. Researchers utilizing machine learning and other artificial intelligence techniques may need large, labeled data to use as training and testing sets, to test algorithms and protocols that they have developed, or to assess the viability of their design methodologies. More generally, datasets can motivate research questions or identify areas to target in future work. Equitable access to data is also essential for replicable and reproducible research.

Additionally, identification of the specific dataset needs of the research community may motivate the collection of specific new types of data or the creation of new tools for accessing and analyzing data. Existing or future NSF infrastructure investments, such as the Platforms for Advanced Wireless Research (PAWR), may be important venues for collecting the identified data.

This Request for Information (RFI) seeks input from the community on the specific needs related to collecting, sharing, and utilizing public or private datasets for networking and computer systems research, and any challenges associated with each. The input could identify requirements for datasets that may include, but are not limited to, spectrum data, physical layer data, network and internet measurement data, workload data, power/performance data, and other systems data. NSF recognizes that some datasets currently exist but is interested in needs that are not currently met by these existing datasets, conventions or formats that may broaden the usability of the data, and ways in which additional high-quality datasets may be made available to the research community. NSF is interested in assessing where research progress is slowed due to the lack of datasets that may either already exist or can be generated using existing infrastructure (including NSF-funded infrastructure). NSF may use the responses to this RFI to inform and refine future investments.

NSF invites individuals and groups of individuals to provide their inputs via the online submission form (link below). The submission form requires the following information:

• Contact person name and affiliation.

• Valid contact email address.

• Additional author name(s) and affiliation(s).

• Research domain(s), discipline(s)/sub-discipline(s) of the author(s), including either NeTS, NeTS-Wireless, or CSR.

• Title of the response.

• Abstract (maximum 200 words) summarizing the response.

• Question 1 (maximum 1000 words)—Data Needed for Research. State whether or not your research requires datasets. If your research requires datasets, describe whether or not you have access to the needed datasets with sufficient quality; and describe what type of data would address your current need for datasets if it is not being met. NSF is interested in where the lack of datasets and/or the quality of datasets may be holding back research, what datasets would help take research to the next level, and the proportion of researchers that have a need for datasets.

• Question 2 (maximum 600 words)—Ability to Contribute. Describe the type of datasets you may be able to contribute to the research community and any barriers to making these datasets available to the research community over at least a seven-year period.

• Question 3 (maximum 600 words)—Privacy. Describe the concerns, either as a user and/or a data provider, that you may have in maintaining and ensuring data privacy, in anonymizing data, and in the effects of data anonymization on data quality. Specific ideas to address data privacy and anonymization concerns are also welcome.

• Question 4 (maximum 600 words)—Format and Metadata. Describe any suggested formats or standards with which datasets should conform. Describe the types of metadata which should be included with data, as well as particular parameters of concern in the data collection or generation.

• Question 5 (maximum 600 words)—Other Considerations. Any other relevant aspects that need to be addressed; or any other issues that NSF should consider, such as where such datasets may exist (e.g. Federal agency, industry, service providers, international partners) and intellectual property concerns.

• Checkbox to consent to NSF's use and display of the submitted information, consistent with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode ). NSF anticipates making submissions publicly accessible through a website.

To respond to this RFI, please use the official form available at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RFIDCLSurvey. We recommend writing out your responses in a separate document, and then pasting them into the response fields on the form.

NSF will use the information submitted in response to this RFI at its discretion and will not provide comments to any responder's submission. The information provided will be analyzed, may appear in reports, and may be shared publicly on agency websites. Respondents are advised that the government is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information or provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted. No proprietary, classified, confidential, or sensitive information should be included in your response. The government reserves the right to use any non-proprietary technical information in any resultant solicitation(s), policies, or procedures.

The NRC is considering the approval of the initial and updated DFPs submitted by ISFSI licensees. The NRC staff has prepared a final EA and FONSI determination for each of the initial and updated ISFSI DFPs in accordance with the NRC regulations in part 51 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,” which implement the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ).

The NRC requires its licensees to plan for the eventual decommissioning of their licensed facilities prior to license termination. On June 17, 2011, the NRC published a final rule in the Federal Register amending its decommissioning planning regulations (76 FR 35512). The final rule amended the NRC regulation, 10 CFR 72.30, which concerns financial assurance and decommissioning for ISFSIs. This regulation requires each holder of, or applicant for, a license under 10 CFR part 72 to submit a DFP for the NRC's review and approval. The DFP is to demonstrate the licensee's financial assurance, i.e., that funds will be available to decommission the ISFSI. The NRC staff will later publish its financial analyses of the DFP submittals which will be available for public inspection in ADAMS.

The following table includes the plant name, docket number, licensee, and ADAMS Accession Number for the final EA and FONSI determination for each of the individual ISFSIs. The table also includes the ADAMS Accession Numbers for other relevant documents, including the initial and updated DFP submittals. For further details with respect to these actions, see the NRC staff's Final EA and FONSI determinations which are available for public inspection in ADAMS and at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2021-0076. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the ADDRESSES section of this document.

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. 3206-0245). 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, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

RI 20-120 is designed to collect information the Office of Personnel Management needs to comply with the wishes of the retired Federal employee whose marriage has ended. This form provides an organized way for the retiree to give us everything at one time.

Agency: Retirement Operations, Retirement Services, Office of Personnel Management.

Title: Request for Change to Unreduced Annuity.

OMB Number: 3206-0245.

Frequency: On occasion.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Number of Respondents: 5,000.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 30 minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 2,500 minutes.

The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

1. The Trust is a business trust organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and will consist of one or more series operating as a Fund. The Trust is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Act. Applicants seek relief with respect to Funds (as defined below), including three initial Funds (the “Initial Funds”). The Funds will offer exchange-traded shares utilizing active management investment strategies as contemplated by the Reference Order. 2

2. The Initial Adviser, an Illinois limited liability company, will be the investment adviser to the Initial Funds. Subject to approval by the Fund's board of trustees, an Adviser (as defined below) will serve as investment adviser to each Fund. The Initial Adviser is, and any other Adviser will be, registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”). The Adviser may enter into sub-advisory agreements with other investment advisers to act as sub-advisers with respect to the Funds (each a “Sub-Adviser”). Any Sub-Adviser to a Fund will be registered under the Advisers Act.

3. The Distributor is a limited liability company and a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will act as the principal underwriter of Shares of the Funds. Applicants request that the requested relief apply to any distributor of Shares, whether affiliated or unaffiliated with the Adviser and/or Sub-Adviser (included in the term “Distributor”). Any Distributor will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order.

4. Applicants seek the requested Order under section 6(c) of the Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act. The requested Order would permit applicants to offer Funds that utilize the NYSE Proxy Portfolio Methodology. Because the relief requested is the same as certain of the relief granted by the Commission under the Reference Order and because the Initial Adviser has entered into a licensing agreement with NYSE Group, Inc. in order to offer Funds that utilize the NYSE Proxy Portfolio Methodology, 3 the Order would incorporate by reference the terms and conditions of the same relief of the Reference Order.

5. Applicants request that the Order apply to the Initial Funds and to any other existing or future registered open-end management investment company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by the Initial Adviser or any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Initial Adviser (any such entity, along with the Initial Adviser, included in the term “Adviser”); (b) offers exchange-traded shares utilizing active management investment strategies as contemplated by the Reference Order; and (c) complies with the terms and conditions of the Order and the terms and conditions of the Reference Order that are incorporated by reference into the Order (each such company or series and each Initial Fund, a “Fund”). 4

6. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons, securities or transactions, from any provisions of the Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and the transaction is consistent with the policies of the registered investment company and the general purposes of the Act. Applicants submit that for the reasons stated in the Reference Order the requested relief meets the exemptive standards under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act.