The following items are on the agenda, although agenda items may be addressed out of order (changes will be noted on the Council's website when possible).

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c).

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Shelley Spedden, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The SEDAR Steering Committee provides guidance and oversight of the SEDAR stock assessment program and manages assessment scheduling. The items of discussion for this meeting are as follows: SEDAR projects update; SEDAR projects schedule; SEDAR process review and discussions; and other business.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SEDAR office (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 business days prior to the meeting.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The SSC agenda will include the following issues:

(1) Administrative Issues including Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding proposal.

(2) BSAI Crab Specifications—review Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) report; adopt Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC)/Over Fishing Limits (OFLs) for Bristol Bay red king crab (BBRKC), Tanner crab, snow crab, Pribilof Island blue king crab (PIBKC); Ecosystem Status Report; BSAI Crab Plan Team Report.

(3) BSAI/Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Groundfish—Proposed specifications; Plan Team reports.

(4) Chum Salmon bycatch—preliminary review.

(5) BSAI Crab Program Review—review workplan.

(6) Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program Review—review workplan.

The agenda is subject to change, and the latest version will be posted at https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/3004 prior to the meeting, along with meeting materials.

In addition to providing ongoing scientific advice for fishery management decisions, the SSC functions as the Council's primary peer review panel for scientific information, as described by the Magnuson-Stevens Act section 302(g)(1)(e), and the National Standard 2 guidelines (78 FR 43066). The peer-review process is also deemed to satisfy the requirements of the Information Quality Act, including the OMB Peer Review Bulletin guidelines.

Trawl Gear Performance Standard Workshop agenda:

The NPFMC will host a workshop to engage with stakeholders and fishery participants on ways to revise the trawl gear performance standard so that it is clear, enforceable, and meets Council objectives. The trawl performance standard regulation prohibits the presence of 20 or more crab above a threshold size limit, at any time, while directed fishing for pollock using pelagic trawl gear. Variations of the performance standard apply in both the BSAI and GOA. The agenda is subject to change, and the latest version will be posted at https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/1885 prior to the meeting, along with meeting materials.

The Advisory Panel agenda will include the following issues:

(1) Administrative Issues.

(2) Observer 2024 Annual Deployment Plan; PCFMAC report.

(3) Crab Facility Use Caps—Initial Review.

(4) BSAI Crab Specifications—review SAFE report; adopt ABC/OFLs for BBRKC, Tanner crab, snow crab, PIBKC; BSAI Crab Plan Team Report.

(5) BSAI/GOA Groundfish—Proposed specifications; Plan Team reports; GOA Demersal Shelf Rockfish (DSR)/other rockfish spatial management.

(6) Chum Salmon bycatch—preliminary review.

(7) Area 4 Vessel Use Caps—Initial Review (tentative).

(8) Bering Sea Local Knowledge/Traditional Knowledge/Subsistence Information Protocol and Onramps—final action to approve protocol and onramps.

(9) BSAI Crab Program Review—review workplan.

(10) IFQ Program Review—review workplan.

(11) Staff Tasking.

The Council agenda will include the following issues. The Council may take appropriate action on any of the issues identified.

(1) B Reports (Executive Director including IRA funding proposal, NMFS Management including Salmon FMP Secretarial amendment and update on National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) changes, NOAA General Counsel (GC), Alaska Fishery Science Center (AFSC), Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), United States Coast Guard (USCG), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), North Pacific Fisheries Commission, North Pacific Research Board, Advisory Panel, SSC report).

(2) BSAI Crab Specifications—review SAFE report; adopt ABC/OFLs for BBRKC, Tanner crab, snow crab, PIBKC; BSAI Crab Plan Team Report.

(3) Observer 2024 Annual Deployment Plan; PCFMAC report.

(4) BSAI/GOA Groundfish—Proposed specifications; Plan Team reports; GOA Demersal Shelf Rockfish (DSR)/other rockfish spatial management.

(5) Chum Salmon bycatch—preliminary review.

(6) Area 4 Vessel Use Caps—Initial Review (tentative).

(7) Crab Facility Use Caps—Initial Review.

(8) Bering Sea Local Knowledge/Traditional Knowledge/Subsistence Information Protocol and Onramps—final action to approve protocol and onramps.

(9) BSAI Crab Program Review—review workplan.

(10) IFQ Program Review—review workplan.

(11) Staff Tasking.

You can attend the meeting online using a computer, tablet, or smart phone; or by phone only. Connection information will be posted online at: https://www.npfmc.org/upcoming-council-meetings. For technical support, please contact our administrative staff, email: npfmc.admin@noaa.gov .

If you are attending the meeting in-person, please refer to the COVID avoidance protocols on our website, https://www.npfmc.org/current-or-next-council-meeting/ .

Public comment letters will be accepted and should be submitted electronically through the links at https://www.npfmc.org/current-or-next-council-meeting/ . The Council strongly encourages written public comment for this meeting, to avoid any potential for technical difficulties to compromise oral testimony. The written comment period is open from September 8, 2023, to September 29, 2023, and closes at 12 p.m. Alaska time on Friday, September 29, 2023.

Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Agenda items for the Outreach and Communications AP meeting include: updates from AP members on recent outreach and communication efforts and needs; update of the Council's Best Fishing Practices Program and new projects; an update on the Council's Citizen Science Program and projects; a review of the Council's draft Habitat Blueprint relative to outreach and communication needs; overview of plans by the Council to conduct port meetings for the mackerel fishery in 2024; and a review and discussion of the education and outreach component for Amendment 46 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan addressing private recreational permitting for the fishery. AP members will also receive an update on the Council's website and social media, and review the Council's E-Newsletter. The AP will address other business as needed and provide recommendations for Council consideration.

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) 10 days prior to the meeting.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to procure the product(s) listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

The following product(s) are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

The following product(s) and service(s) are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

On 8/11/2023, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed additions to the Procurement List. This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3.

After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the product(s) and service(s) and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the product(s) and service(s) listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the product(s) and service(s) to the Government.

2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product(s) and service(s) to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the product(s) and service(s) proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following product(s) and service(s) are added to the Procurement List:

This committee meeting is being held under the provisions of Chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.) (commonly known as the “Federal Advisory Committee Act” or “FACA”), section 552b of title 5, U.S.C. (commonly known as the “Government in the Sunshine Act”), and sections 102-3.140 and 102-3.150 of title 41, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Purpose of the Meeting: The Board is chartered to provide independent advice and recommendations to the Secretary of the Army on construction and rehabilitation project investments on the commercial navigation features of the inland waterways system of the United States. At this meeting, the Board will receive briefings and presentations regarding the investments, projects, and status of the inland waterways system of the United States and conduct discussions and deliberations on those matters. The Board is interested in written and verbal comments from the public relevant to these purposes.

Agenda: At this meeting the agenda will include the status of the Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF); Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget funding for Navigation; Low Water Actions for 2023; status of the Illinois Waterway Consolidated Closure for 2023; updates of inland waterways projects for the Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP), McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System (MKARNS) Three Rivers, Arkansas, and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) Brazos River Floodgates and Colorado River Locks; status of the ongoing construction activities for the Monongahela River Locks and Dams 2, 3, and 4 Replacements, the Upper Ohio River Montgomery Lock, Chickamauga Lock and Kentucky Lock Addition projects.

Availability of Materials for the Meeting. A copy of the agenda or any updates to the agenda for the October 19, 2023, meeting will be available. The final version will be available at the meeting. All materials will be posted to the website for the meeting.

Public Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.1 65, and subject to the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Registration of members of the public who wish to participate in the meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Participation is on a first-to-arrive basis. Any interested person may participate in the meeting, file written comments or statements with the committee, or make verbal comments during the public meeting, at the times, and in the manner, permitted by the committee, as set forth below.

Special Accommodations: Individuals requiring any special accommodations related to the public meeting or seeking additional information about the procedures, should contact Mr. Mark Pointon, the committee DFO, or Mr. Steven Riley, an ADFO, at the email addresses or telephone numbers listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

Written Comments or Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the Board about its mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Mr. Pointon, the committee DFO, or Mr. Riley, a committee ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word. The comment or statement must include the author's name, title, affiliation, address, and daytime telephone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the committee DFO or ADFO at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that they may be made available to the Board for its consideration prior to the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the Board until its next meeting. Please note that because the Board operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all written comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection.

Verbal Comments: Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the public meeting only at the time and in the manner allowed herein. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least three (3) business days in advance to the committee DFO or ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The committee DFO and ADFO will log each request to make a comment, in the order received, and determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the Board's mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 15-minute period near the end of the meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described above, will be allotted no more than three (3) minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO and ADFO.

The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Educational Opportunity Centers Program (EOC) Annual Performance Report.

OMB Control Number: 1840-0830.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Private Sector.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 183.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,464.

Abstract: The Department of Education (ED) collects Annual Performance Reports (APRs) from Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) grantees under the authority of Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, Division 1, Sections 402A and 402B of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, the program regulations in 34 CFR 644, and the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), in 34 CFR 74.51, 75.720, and 75.732. The information that grantees submit in their APRs allows ED to annually assess each grantee's progress in meeting their project's approved goals and objectives. The APR data that grantees submit are compared with the projects' approved objectives to determine the projects' accomplishments, to make decisions regarding whether funding should be continued, and to award “prior experience” points. The regulations for this program provide for awarding up to 15 points for prior experience (34 CR 644.22). During a competition for new grant awards, the prior experience points are added to the average of the peer reviewers' scores to arrive at a total score for each application. Funding recommendations and decisions are primarily based on the rank order of applications on the slate; therefore, assessment of prior experience points, based on data in the annual performance report, is a crucial part of the overall application process.

Further, this performance report form is the main source of data for the Department's response to the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) for this program. In addition, the Department uses the annual performance reports to produce program level data for annual reporting, budget submissions to OMB, Congressional hearings and inquiries, and responding to inquiries from higher education interest groups and the general public.

EOC APRs are prepared and submitted by EOC grant projects. For each EOC grant project, the grant project director of record completes, or supervises the completion of the data submission process. The grant project director supervises the administration of an EOC grant. An EOC grant provides counseling and information on college admissions to qualified adults who want to enter or continue a program of postsecondary education. The program also provides services to improve the financial and economic literacy of participants. An important objective of the program is to counsel participants on financial aid options, including basic financial planning skills, and to assist in the application process. The goal of the EOC program is to increase the number of adult participants who enroll in postsecondary education institutions.

The proposed revision to the APR entails replacement of Competitive Preference Priority (CPP) questions with new CPP questions of equal response time. In addition, the annual number of responses and total annual burden hours have been adjusted to reflect an increase in the size of the reporting universe.

The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: 2024-2025 Free Application for Federal Student Aid.

OMB Control Number: 1845-0001.

Type of Review: A revision of a currently approved ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and households. Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 34,328,439.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 22,417,460.

Abstract: Section 483, of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), mandates that the Secretary of Education “. . . shall produce, distribute, and process free of charge common financial reporting forms as described in this subsection to be used for application and reapplication to determine the need and eligibility of a student for financial assistance . . .”.

The determination of need and eligibility are for the following title IV, HEA, federal student financial assistance programs: the Federal Pell Grant Program; the Campus-Based programs (Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG) and Federal Work-Study (FWS)),; the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) Program; the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant; the Children of Fallen Heroes Scholarship; and the Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grant.

Federal Student Aid (FSA), an office of the U.S. Department of Education, subsequently developed an application process to collect and process the data necessary to determine a student's eligibility to receive Title IV, HEA program assistance. The application process involves an applicant's submission of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA®). After submission and processing of the FAFSA form, an applicant receives a FAFSA Submission Report, which is a summary of the processed data they submitted on the FAFSA form. The applicant reviews the FAFSA Submission Summary, and, if necessary, will make corrections or updates to their submitted FAFSA data. Institutions of higher education listed by the applicant on the FAFSA form also receive a summary of processed data submitted on the FAFSA form which is called the Institutional Student Information Record (ISIR).

ED and FSA seek OMB approval of all application components as a single “collection of information.” The aggregate burden will be accounted for under OMB Control Number 1845-0001. The specific application components, descriptions, and submission methods for each are listed in Table 1.

This information collection also documents an estimate of the annual public burden as it relates to the application process for federal student aid. The Applicant Burden Model (ABM) measures applicant burden through an assessment of the activities each applicant conducts in conjunction with other applicant characteristics and, in terms of burden, the average applicant's experience. Key determinants of the ABM include:

• The total number of applicants that will potentially apply for federal student aid;

• How the applicant chooses to complete and submit the FAFSA form ( e.g., by paper or electronically);

• How the applicant chooses to submit any corrections and/or updates ( e.g., the paper FAFSA Submission Summary or electronically);

• The type of FAFSA Submission Summary document the applicant receives (paper or electronic);

• The formula applied to determine the applicant's student aid index (SAI); and

• The average amount of time involved in preparing to complete the application.

The ABM is largely driven by the number of potential applicants for the application cycle. The total application projection for 2024-2025 is based on the projected total enrollment into post-secondary education for Fall 2024. The ABM is also based on the application options available to students and parents. ED accounts for each application component based on analytical tools, survey information and other ED data sources.

For 2024-2025, ED is reporting a net burden decrease of 427,252 hours.

Title and OMB Number: Application for ESTEP Participation, OMB Number Pending.

Purpose: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, the EAC is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

The EAC Election Supporting Technology Evaluation Program evaluates the security and accessibility of election-supporting technologies, including electronic poll books, voter registration systems, electronic ballot delivery systems, and election night reporting databases. The program is to publish one form. This is to be used to collect key information concerning election-supporting technology manufacturers and their systems. The application for participation in the Election Supporting Technology Evaluation Program collects administrative information on new or modified election-supporting technology systems that are being submitted for testing by a registered manufacturer.

This information is collected to improve the quality of election-supporting technology used in federal elections.

Public Comments: We are soliciting public comments to permit the EAC to:

• Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary and sufficient for the proper functions of the Election Supporting Technology Evaluation Program.

• Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information to be collected.

• Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Please note that comments submitted in response to this Notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your submitted comments, including your personal information, will be available for public review.

Respondents: Election Supporting Technology Manufacturers, State and Local Election Officials.

OMB approval is requested for 3 years.

In Table II of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI) on the NOCs that have passed an initial screening by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the NOC including whether the submission was an initial or amended submission, the date the NOC was received by EPA, the date of commencement provided by the submitter in the NOC, a notation of the type of amendment ( e.g., amendment to generic name, specific name, technical contact information, etc.) and chemical substance identity.

In Table III of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the test information that has been received during this time period: The EPA case number assigned to the test information; the date the test information was received by EPA, the type of test information submitted, and chemical substance identity.

If you are interested in information that is not included in these tables, you may contact EPA's technical information contact or general information contact as described under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to access additional non-CBI information that may be available.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to all who manufacture, process, or distribute industrial chemicals. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004 is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets .

Under EPA contract number 68HERD20A0002/68HERH23F0207, contractor ERG of 110 Hartwell Ave, Suite 1 Lexington, MA/14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200 Chantilly, VA will assist the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) in supporting in engineering assessments for the exposure evaluation and assessment of chemical substances and related regulatory actions.

In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), EPA has determined that under EPA contract number 68HERD20A0002/68HERH23F0207, ERG will require access to CBI submitted to EPA under all section(s) of TSCA to perform successfully the duties specified under the contract. ERG personnel will be given access to information submitted to EPA under all section(s) of TSCA. Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be CBI.

EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information under all sections of TSCA that EPA may provide ERG access to these CBI materials on a need-to-know basis only. All access to TSCA CBI under this contract will take place at EPA Headquarters and ERG's site located at 14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200, Chantilly, VA, in accordance with EPA's TSCA CBI Protection Manual .

Access to TSCA data, including CBI, will continue until May 20, 2024. If the contract is extended, this access will also continue for the duration of the extended contract without further notice.

ERG personnel will be required to sign nondisclosure agreements and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures before they are permitted access to TSCA CBI.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

The Privacy Act provides that an agency may collect or maintain in its records only information about individuals that is relevant and necessary to accomplish a purpose that is required by a statute or executive order. The FCC has determined that the FCC/WTB-5, Application Review List for Present or Former Licensees, Operators, or Unlicensed Persons Operating Radio Equipment, system of records no longer meets this standard, because WTB no longer maintains the system's manual lists, nor has it retained any paper files from this system. The lists are now contained in an electronic alert list in the FCC/WTB-1, Wireless Services Licensing Records, system of records. All of the paper records for this system have been destroyed in accordance with the retention and disposal provisions of the WTB-5 SORN. Therefore, the FCC proposes to rescind FCC/WTB-5, Application Review List for Present or Former Licensees, Operators, or Unlicensed Persons Operating Radio Equipment Improperly.

Agenda: The agenda will include a discussion of issues that are of interest to community banks. The agenda is subject to change. Any changes to the agenda will be announced at the beginning of the meeting.

Type of Meeting: The meeting will be open to the public, limited only by the space available on a first-come, first-served basis. For security reasons, members of the public will be subject to security screening procedures and must present a valid photo identification to enter the building. Observers requiring auxiliary aids ( e.g., sign language interpretation) for this meeting should email DisabilityProgram@fdic.gov to make necessary arrangements. This meeting of the Advisory Committee on Community Banking will also be Webcast live via the internet at http://fdic.windrosemedia.com. For optimal viewing, a high-speed internet connection is recommended. To view the recording, visit http://fdic.windrosemedia.com/index.php?category=Community+Banking+Advisory+Committee. Written statements may be filed with the Advisory Committee before or after the meeting.

Title: Fuel Rating Rule (the Rule), 16 CFR part 306.

OMB Control Number: 3084-0068.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Likely Respondents:

(a) Recordkeeping: Refiners, Producers, Importers, Distributors, and Retailers of the Covered Fuel Types.

(b) Disclosure: Retailers of the Covered Fuel Types.

Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 31,976 (derived from 13,043 recordkeeping hours added to 18,933 disclosure hours).

Estimated Annual Labor Costs: $481,374. 1

Estimated Annual Capital or Other Non-labor Costs: $104,888. 2

Abstract: The Fuel Rating Rule establishes standard procedures for determining, certifying, and disclosing the octane rating of automotive gasoline and the automotive fuel rating of alternative liquid automotive fuels, as required by the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act. 15 U.S.C. 2822(a)-(c). The Rule also requires refiners, producers, importers, distributors, and retailers to retain records showing how the ratings were determined, including delivery tickets or letters of certification.

On May 2, 2023, the FTC sought public comment on the information collection requirements associated with the Rule. 88 FR 27514. No germane comments were received. Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, that implement the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the FTC is providing this second opportunity for public comment while seeking OMB approval to renew the pre-existing clearance for the Rule.

Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive personal information, such as anyone's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

The Proposed Action is to address the future of the three vacant buildings at 202, 214 and 220 South State Street, east of the Dirksen Courthouse. The purpose of the Proposed Action is to address the security needs of the Dirksen Courthouse, respond to Congressional intent considering the authorization of funds made to GSA by Congress in the 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act, and manage Federal assets.

Demolition (Alternative A): This alternative would demolish the buildings at 202, 214 and 220 South State Street, Chicago, Illinois. In the 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress appropriated funding to GSA for the purpose of demolition of the buildings, protecting adjacent buildings, securing the site, and landscaping the vacant site following demolition.

Viable Adaptive Reuse (Alternative B): This alternative would involve contracting with one or more private developers to lease and use the three buildings at 202, 214, and 220 South State Street in accordance with the 15 viable adaptive reuse criteria, listed below, that were developed by GSA in collaboration with the U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois and Federal law enforcement agencies. These criteria were established to achieve GSA's and Federal law enforcement agencies' security objectives for the Dirksen Courthouse and would apply to any future uses of the buildings. No Federal funds would be available for rehabilitation, preservation, or restoration of buildings at 202, 214, and 220 South State Street, Chicago, Illinois; therefore, any rehabilitation or modification of the buildings to meet the criteria would not be performed at the Federal Government's expense. However, developers will have the opportunity to make improvements to the buildings in lieu of rent in accordance with section 111 of the National Historic Preservation Act. GSA will consider viable adaptive reuse alternatives if they meet or exceed the following viable adaptive reuse criteria. These restrictions would be applicable to all tenants and subtenants in perpetuity:

1. The Federal Government must retain ownership interests to achieve its security objectives, as determined by the government in its discretion.

2. Occupancy/Use: Properties shall not be used for short-term or long-term residential or lodging, places of worship, or medical treatment, services, or research. No use that requires access to outdoor areas is permitted.

3. Access to the roof is restricted to maintenance and repair activities. Personnel and materials that will be present in this area shall be subject to clearance and controls necessary to meet court security objectives.

4. Developer would have no access or use rights to Quincy Court.

5. Loading is prohibited in Quincy Court and otherwise restricted in a manner to achieve court security. Loading on State or Adams Streets would be subject to local ordinance requirements.

6. Occupants and users of the buildings shall have no sight lines into the Dirksen Courthouse, the Dirksen Courthouse ramp, or the Quincy Court properties owned by GSA.

7. No parking or vehicle access is permitted on or within the properties.

8. Developer is responsible for staffing, at their expense, security 24 hours with personnel approved by the Federal Protective Service or an entity to whom security services are delegated by Federal Protective Service.

9. Developer must obtain and maintain access control systems to prevent unauthorized access to any location within the structures. Each exterior entrance point must have an intrusion detection system and access control system installed, and Developer must provide Federal law enforcement access to each system.

10. Developer must install and maintain interior and exterior security cameras and provide Federal law enforcement officials with access and the ability to monitor the feeds in real time.

11. Developer must install exterior lighting necessary to achieve courthouse security objectives.

12. Perimeter Security: Developer must prevent unauthorized access to the properties that would result in an unapproved sight line.

13. Fire escapes, and any other structures that would allow access from the street, must be removed.

14. All construction documents and specifications for any renovation, rehabilitation, modification, or construction of any portion of the building (interior or exterior) will be subject to review and approval by Federal law enforcement agencies.

15. No project may start without the advance approval of GSA.

GSA would continue to monitor the buildings' condition and secure the buildings; the buildings would remain in place and vacant, in need of significant repairs. GSA would also continue its efforts to develop a long-term plan for the buildings, as it has since it acquired them. GSA would have limited Federal funds available to continue with the maintenance and the buildings would be at risk of further deterioration.

After the Notice of Intent to prepare this Draft EIS was issued, GSA undertook an emergency action to demolish 208-212 South State Street because the structure posed an immediate threat to human health and safety. The demolition of 208-212 South State Street, a non-historic property, was a separate action and GSA completed an emergency Environmental Assessment (EA) to comply with NEPA. 208-212 South State Street was thus removed from the analysis of this Proposed Action.

The Draft EIS identifies, describes, and analyzes the potential effects of the Action and No Action alternatives, including direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. GSA identified the following resources for analysis of both beneficial and adverse potential impacts: cultural resources; aesthetic and visual resources; land use and zoning; community facilities; socioeconomics and environmental justice; greenhouse gas, climate change, and embodied carbon; hazardous materials and solid waste; air quality; noise; health and safety; and transportation and traffic. The Draft EIS considers measures that would avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified adverse impacts. GSA welcomes public input on these potential impacts.

In addition to NEPA, consultation under section 106 of the NHPA is occurring concurrently with the NEPA process. Two of the three buildings being considered for demolition are the Century Building (202 South State Street) and the Consumers Building (220 South State Street), which are historic resources that contribute to the Loop Retail Historic District listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). In this proposed action, 214 South State Street is being treated as eligible for listing in the NRHP as a contributing resource to the Loop Retail Historic District.

The following is a list of estimated time frames to complete the NEPA process:

The information in the GSA/OAP-4 FedBizOps SORN is now obsolete as all relevant records are now maintained in a different system, GSA's SAM.gov. It should be removed from GSA's inventory once OMB approves via ROCIS (OMB OIRA—Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs).

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces a meeting of the National Advisory Council for Healthcare Research and Quality (the Council). 5 U.S.C. 1009. The Council is authorized by section 941 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 299c. In accordance with its statutory mandate, the Council is to advise the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Director of AHRQ on matters related to AHRQ's conduct of its mission including providing guidance on (A) priorities for health care research, (B) the field of health care research including training needs and information dissemination on health care quality and (C) the role of the Agency in light of private sector activity and opportunities for public private partnerships. The Council is composed of members of the public, appointed by the Secretary, and Federal ex-officio members specified in the authorizing legislation.

On Thursday, November 16, 2023, NAC members will meet to conduct preparatory work prior to convening the Council meeting at 10:45 a.m., with the call to order by the Council Chair, an introduction of NAC members, and approval of previous Council summary notes. The NAC members will then receive an update from the AHRQ Director. The agenda will also include an update on the Subcommittee of the National Advisory Council (SNAC) for AHRQ's Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (PCORTF) Investments, as well as an update on the Subcommittee of the National Advisory Council (SNAC) for the National Action Alliance to Advance Patient Safety. The meeting will also include a discussion about the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and System (CAHPS). The meeting is open to the public and will adjourn at 4 p.m. For information regarding how to access the meeting as well as other meeting details, including information on how to make a public comment, please go to https://www.ahrq.gov/news/events/nac/. The final agenda will be available on the AHRQ website no later than Thursday, November 2, 2023.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Add-On Payments for New Medical Services and Technologies Paid Under the Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS); Use: Sections 1886(d) (5) (K) and (L) of the Act establish a process of identifying and ensuring adequate payment for new medical services and technologies (sometimes collectively referred to in this section as “new technologies”) under the Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS). Section 1886(d)(5)(K)(vi) of the Act specifies that a medical service or technology will be considered new if it meets criteria established by the Secretary after notice and opportunity for public comment. Section 1886(d)(5)(K)(ii)(I) of the Act specifies that a new medical service or technology may be considered for NTAP if, “based on the estimated costs incurred with respect to discharges involving such service or technology, the DRG prospective payment rate otherwise applicable to such discharges under this subsection is inadequate.”

In order to qualify for NTAP under the traditional pathway, a specific technology must be “new” and demonstrate that they are not substantially similar to existing technologies under the requirements of § 412.87(b)(2) of our regulations. The statutory provision contemplated the special payment treatment for new technologies until such time as data are available to reflect the cost of the technology in the DRG weights through recalibration (no less than 2 years and no more than 3 years). Alternative pathway technologies must also be “new” but are considered not substantially similar to existing technologies. Responses to the questions in the application help CMS determine if and how the applicant meets the established. Form Number: CMS-10638 (OMB Control Number: 0938-1347); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private Sector, Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profits institutions; Number of Respondents: 62; Number of Responses: 62; Total Annual Hours: 1,655. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Sophia Chan at 410-786-8348.)

2. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection of information; Title of Information Collection: Health Insurance Common Claims Form; Use: The CMS-1500 and the CMS-1490S forms are used to deliver information to CMS in order for CMS to reimburse for provided services. Medicare Administrative Contractors use the data collected on the CMS-1500 and the CMS-1490S to determine the proper amount of reimbursement for Part B medical and other health services (as listed in section 1861(s) of the Social Security Act) provided by physicians and suppliers to beneficiaries. The CMS-1500 is submitted by physicians/suppliers for all Part B Medicare. Serving as a common claim form, the CMS-1500 can be used by other third-party payers (commercial and nonprofit health insurers) and other Federal programs ( e.g., TRICARE, RRB, and Medicaid). Form Number: CMS-1500 (OMB Control Number: 0938-1197); Frequency: Occasionally; Affected Public: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit and not-for-profit institutions; Number of Respondents: 2,451,781; Number of Responses: 975,664,249; Total Annual Hours: 17,163,310. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Charlene Parks at 410-786-8684.)

FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Annual Status Report Information and Other Submissions for Postmarketing Requirements and Commitments: Using Forms FDA 3988 and FDA 3989.” This guidance is intended for applicants that are required to report annually on the status of postmarketing studies and clinical trials for human drug and biological products under section 506B of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 356b) and its implementing regulations at §§ 314.81(b)(2)(vii) and 601.70 (21 CFR 314.81(b)(2)(vii) and 601.70). The forms were developed, in part, in response to the recommendations from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) regarding the need for comparable information across annual status reports (ASRs) on PMRs and PMCs, to eliminate manual data entry and to enhance FDA's ability to track PMRs and PMCs. These forms are expected to result in improved accuracy and timeliness of FDA's identification and review of those submissions containing information on PMRs and PMCs. The purpose of the guidance is to explain why Forms FDA 3988 and FDA 3989 were created, describe the contents of the forms, and explain how to submit the forms electronically. The guidance also explains where applicants will be able to find the forms and instructions for their completion. Forms FDA 3988 and FDA 3989 are available for use at FDA's Forms web page ( https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports-manuals-forms/forms ).

PMRs and PMCs are studies or clinical trials conducted by the applicant after FDA has approved a drug or biological product for marketing or licensing. These studies or clinical trials can be required under statute or regulation (PMRs) or agreed upon in writing by FDA and the applicant (PMCs). Section 130(a) of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 amended the FD&C Act by adding section 506B of the FD&C Act. Under section 506B of the FD&C Act and its implementing regulations at §§ 314.81(b)(2)(vii) and 601.70, applicants must submit an ASR on PMRs and PMCs. 1 This report must address the progress of the PMR/PMC or the reasons for failing to conduct the requirement or commitment (section 506B(a) of the FD&C Act).

This guidance does not apply to postmarketing studies or clinical trials that are not subject to the reporting requirements of section 506B of the FD&C Act. 2 For example, the guidance does not apply to voluntary studies or clinical trials performed by an applicant or on an applicant's behalf that are neither required nor agreed upon in writing. This guidance also does not apply to PMCs related to chemistry, manufacturing, and controls or stability studies.

In a December 2015 report from the GAO entitled “Drug Safety: FDA Expedites Many Applications, but Data for Postapproval Oversight Need Improvement,”  3 the GAO recommended that FDA improve its data tracking to ensure the completeness, timeliness, and accuracy of information in its database on PMRs/PMCs. Additionally, in a July 2016 HHS OIG study entitled “FDA is Issuing More Postmarketing Requirements, but Challenges with Oversight Persist,”  4 the HHS OIG noted that FDA continued to have problems with its data management system and work processes, thereby hindering its ability to track PMRs. OIG recommended that FDA provide standardized forms for ASRs, ensure that the forms are complete, and require applicants to submit the forms electronically.

Based in part on the recommendations from GAO and HHS OIG, FDA created Forms FDA 3988 and FDA 3989 to improve the collection, identification, and use of information regarding PMRs and PMCs. Form FDA 3988 was developed to accompany an applicant's PMR/PMC-related submissions ( e.g., draft protocols, final protocols, interim reports, final reports, and PMR/PMC-related correspondence), except the ASR on PMRs and PMCs. Form FDA 3988 allows applicants to identify, in a standardized format, the type of PMR/PMC-related submission the applicant is making ( e.g., draft protocol) and the PMR or PMC to which the submission applies. Form FDA 3989 was developed so that applicants may provide ASR information on their PMRs and PMCs in a standardized format. The purpose of these forms is to assist applicants in providing clearly identified PMR/PMC-related submissions and in meeting their annual reporting requirements under section 506B of the FD&C Act and §§ 314.81(b)(2)(vii) and 601.70.

Use of Forms FDA 3988 and 3989 is optional, but FDA encourages their use because the forms should facilitate FDA management and review of the applicant's submissions, as well as enhance the accuracy of data within FDA's electronic document archiving systems. FDA uses these archiving systems as a source from which to obtain data published annually in the Federal Register as required under section 506B(c) of the FD&C Act and to provide quarterly status updates of the PMR and PMC data on FDA's Postmarket Requirements and Commitments public web page (available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/pmc/index.cfm ). This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same name issued on October 21, 2020 (85 FR 66995). In addition to editorial changes for clarification, changes from the draft to the final included a minor change regarding what to enter into field 9.g. of Form FDA 2252 and the removal of the appendices to the guidance, which contained drafts of Forms FDA 3988 and 3989.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Annual Status Report Information and Other Submissions for Postmarketing Requirements and Commitments: Using Forms FDA 3988 and FDA 3989.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information for applicants required to submit ASRs on PMCs and PMRs under section 506B of the FD&C Act and the implementing regulations at §§ 314.81(b)(2)(vii) and 601.70 are approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0338, respectively.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information-biologics, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance entitled “Breakthrough Devices Program.” The document describes policies that FDA intends to use to implement section 515B of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360e-3), as created by section 3051 of the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act) (Pub. L. 114-255), amended by section 901 of the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 115-52), and amended by section 3001 of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act (Pub. L. 115-271) (the “Breakthrough Devices Program”). The Breakthrough Devices Program is a voluntary program for certain medical devices and device-led combination products that provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions. It is available for devices and device-led combination products that are subject to review under a premarket approval application (PMA), premarket notification (510(k)), or De Novo classification request (“De Novo request”).

The Breakthrough Devices Program may also be applicable to certain devices that benefit populations impacted by health and/or healthcare disparities, thereby promoting and advancing health equity. In addition, consistent with our obligations under section 3001 of the SUPPORT Act, the Breakthrough Devices Program may be available for certain non-addictive medical products to treat pain or addiction (section 515B of the FD&C Act). The considerations set forth in the guidance document apply to FDA's review of devices as non-addictive methods to treat pain or addiction. This program is intended to help patients have more timely access to designated medical devices, including those that provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions in populations impacted by health and/or healthcare disparities, by expediting their development, assessment, and review, while preserving the statutory standards for PMAs, 510(k) clearance, and De Novo marketing authorization, consistent with the Agency's mission to protect and promote public health.

This guidance finalizes the draft guidance entitled “Select Updates for the Breakthrough Devices Program Guidance: Reducing Disparities in Health and Healthcare.” A notice of availability of the draft guidance appeared in the Federal Register of October 21, 2022 (87 FR 64057). FDA considered comments received and revised the guidance as appropriate in response to comments, including further clarifying FDA's intent to consider technologies and device features that may help to address health and/or healthcare disparities and promote health equity by providing for more effective treatment or diagnosis in various populations that exhibit health and healthcare disparities. FDA did not substantively change the sections of the existing Breakthrough Devices Program guidance that were not affected by the select update.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on the “Breakthrough Devices Program.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents or https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information-biologics. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Breakthrough Guidance Program” may send an email request to CDRH-Guidance@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number GUI00001833 and complete title to identify the guidance you are requesting.

While this guidance contains no new collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in the following table have been approved by OMB:

As part of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH's) 2016-2017 strategic priority to “Promote a Culture of Quality and Organizational Excellence,” CDRH envisions a future where the medical device ecosystem is inherently focused on device features and manufacturing practices that have the greatest impact on product quality and patient safety. Among its other regulatory activities, FDA evaluates manufacturers' compliance with regulations governing the design and production of devices. Compliance with the “Quality System Regulation,” 21 CFR part 820, is a baseline requirement for medical device manufacturing firms. 1

In an effort to elevate and enhance manufacturing practices and behaviors through which quality and safety of medical devices can be improved, FDA has collaborated with various stakeholders, brought together through the MDIC public-private partnership, to develop the CfQ Pilot Program. FDA announced the voluntary CfQ Pilot Program in the Federal Register on December 28, 2017 (82 FR 61575).

As in the CfQ Pilot Program, the VIP oversees third-party appraisers who evaluate voluntary industry participants, and the VIP assesses the capability and performance of key business processes using a series of integrated best practices. Those practices are detailed in the Information Systems Audit and Control Association Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) system. CMMI provides a roadmap that guides improvement toward disciplined and consistent processes for achieving key business objectives, including quality and performance. The VIP uses a version of the CMMI appraisal appropriate for the medical device industry. This appraisal tool is referred to as the Medical Device Discovery Appraisal Program (MDDAP) model. The baseline appraisal using the MDDAP model covers 11 practices areas, such as Governance, Implementation Infrastructure, and Managing Performance and Measurement. Subsequent appraisals may include an alternate list of practice areas compared to the baseline set. As part of the VIP, and as in the CfQ Pilot Program, the program provides firms and FDA with information about the firm's capability and performance for activities covered in the third-party appraisal.

Details and results from the 2018 CfQ Pilot Program are outlined in MDIC's Case for Quality Pilot Report, available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/quality-and-compliance-medical-devices/voluntary-medical-device-manufacturing-and-product-quality-pilot-program.

This voluntary program is currently only available to eligible manufacturers of medical devices regulated by CDRH and whose marketing applications are reviewed under the applicable provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (including under sections 510(k), 513, 515, and 520) (21 U.S.C. 360(k), 360c, 360e, and 360j).

A notice of availability of the draft guidance appeared in the Federal Register of May 6, 2022 (87 FR 27165). FDA considered comments received and revised the guidance as appropriate in response to the comments, including clarifying what participants must demonstrate to benefit from the opportunities offered by VIP, explaining that program participation is not a substitute for an FDA inspection, and providing further detail regarding the role of FDA in VIP.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on Fostering Medical Device Improvement: Food and Drug Administration Activities and Engagement with the Voluntary Improvement Program. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Fostering Medical Device Improvement: Food and Drug Administration Activities and Engagement with the Voluntary Improvement Program” may send an email request to CDRH-Guidance@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number GUI00020039 and complete title to identify the guidance you are requesting.

This guidance contains information collection provisions that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The guidance also refers to previously approved FDA collections of information which are also subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in the following FDA regulations, guidance, and forms have been approved by OMB as listed in the following table:

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft GFI #282 entitled “Informed Consent Forms for Studies that Enroll Client-Owned Companion Animals.” As used in this guidance, informed consent is a documented process by which an owner or owner's agent voluntarily confirms the owner's willingness to allow their animal(s) to participate in a particular study, after having been informed of all aspects of the study that may be relevant to the owner's decision to participate. A sponsor or investigator should ensure the owner is provided with adequate information and time to allow for an informed decision about voluntary participation in a clinical investigation. This draft guidance provides recommendations on ICFs used for studies that enroll client-owned companion animals (dogs, cats, and horses). CVM recommends all studies conducted with client-owned companion animals use an ICF and be conducted in accordance with GCP guidelines.

This level 1 draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on “Informed Consent Forms for Studies that Enroll Client-Owned Companion Animals.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 514 and section 571 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0032.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/guidance-regulations/guidance-industry, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

Drug manufacturers can achieve higher levels of QMM by successfully integrating business and manufacturing operations with quality practices and technological advancements to optimize manufacturing process performance and product quality, enhance supply chain reliability, and foster proactive continual improvement. CDER is developing a voluntary program to promote QMM at drug manufacturing establishments. The goals of this program are: (1) to foster a strong quality culture mindset; (2) recognize establishments that have advanced quality management practices and acknowledge establishments that strive to continually improve those practices; (3) identify areas where quality management practices can be enhanced and provide suggestions for growth opportunities; and (4) minimize risks to product availability to assure reliable market supply.

The QMM assessment is designed to appraise an establishment's quality culture mindset, behaviors, and commitment to adopting best practices to effectively meet the needs of patients and consumers. QMM assessments would not be used to evaluate compliance with current good manufacturing practice (CGMP).

QMM assessments would be conducted by trained assessors, who would engage directly with establishments, either onsite or in a hybrid (onsite/remote) environment, for 2 to 5 business days. The QMM assessment will cover five practice areas: (1) management commitment to quality; (2) business continuity; (3) advanced pharmaceutical quality system; (4) technical excellence; and (5) employee engagement and empowerment. Within each practice area, the assessors would explore key elements to better understand an establishment's QMM. Examples of elements covered under each practice area could include: management review and resource management (management commitment to quality practice area), supply planning and demand forecasting (business continuity practice area), data governance and process optimization (technical excellence practice area), effectiveness of the corrective action and preventive action process (advanced pharmaceutical quality system practice area), and rewards and recognition (employee engagement practice area). Each establishment's responses, executed practices, and behaviors would be assessed using a standardized assessment protocol and an objective rubric, which is currently under development, to help identify areas of strength and potential areas with opportunities for improvement.

At a November 2, 2022, meeting of the Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology Advisory Committee, FDA sought to determine the support of academic and industry experts for CDER's development of a QMM program. By a vote of 9-0, the committee affirmed that CDER should establish a QMM program to incentivize investments in mature quality management practices . During deliberations, committee members advised the Agency to continue to seek stakeholder input throughout the program's development. Further information about the November 2022 Advisory Committee meeting, including event materials, is available on FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-calendar/november-2-3-2022-pharmaceutical-science-and-clinical-pharmacology-advisory-committee-meeting. For further information about QMM, relevant research, and previously conducted pilot programs, please see CDER's QMM web page at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/pharmaceutical-quality-resources/cder-quality-management-maturity. FDA has verified the website addresses, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register , but websites are subject to change over time.

FDA is opening a docket to solicit additional feedback from the public on CDER's planned, voluntary QMM program. The public is invited to provide detailed comments on all aspects described in this notice. To facilitate this input, FDA has developed a list of questions. These questions are not exhaustive, and FDA welcomes other pertinent information the public would like to share on this topic. In all cases, FDA encourages the public to provide the reasoning and specific basis for any comments.

1. If you are a manufacturer, please identify the types of drug(s) produced in your establishment ( e.g., active pharmaceutical ingredients, innovator drugs, innovator biologics, generics, biosimilars, or OTC monograph drugs). If you are not a manufacturer, please specify whether you are a purchaser, payor, pharmacy, healthcare provider, patient, regulator, supplier, distributor, contract service provider, or other (please describe).

2. What advantages do you anticipate that your sector ( i.e., your organization and others like yours) would gain from CDER's voluntary QMM program?

3. How would participation in a QMM program benefit you or your specific organization?

4. How would you use information from a QMM assessment if it were provided to your organization? For example, if your organization acts as a supplier or contract organization, would you consider sharing information from a QMM assessment with a potential client? If your organization enters into contracts with purchasers, would you consider sharing information from a QMM assessment with a purchaser? If your organization is a purchaser, would you consider requesting information from a QMM assessment?

5. What, if any, unintended consequences, roadblocks, or other concerns do you anticipate with a voluntary QMM program? What barriers to participation do you anticipate? Please explain. Which of these unintended consequences might be unique to stakeholders like you? Why?

6. FDA anticipates that each establishment would be provided with a detailed report following their QMM assessment. What would you want such a report to contain?

7. With respect to the outcomes of a QMM assessment, what are your thoughts about making outcomes public? Would your thoughts be different if the outcomes were generally qualitative ( e.g., descriptive information) versus quantitative ( e.g., a numerical rating)?

8. What other feedback would you like the FDA to consider for a voluntary QMM program?

The following references are on display with the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES ) and are available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; these are not available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov as these references are copyright protected. Some may be available at the website address, if listed. FDA has verified the website addresses, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register , but websites are subject to change over time.

These draft guidance documents provide recommendations regarding clinical study design for devices with indications for use associated with weight loss, include discussion on how FDA considers the benefit-risk analysis to support such indications, and provide recommendations for non-clinical testing to support premarket submissions for these medical devices. These devices may be indicated for weight loss, weight reduction, weight management, or obesity treatment in patients who are overweight or have obesity. The recommendations and considerations reflect current review practices and are intended to promote consistency and facilitate efficient review of these submissions.

Prior to drafting these guidances, FDA requested public comment on a concept for balancing the benefit of weight loss with the risks of adverse events in a discussion paper (September 2019, Docket No. FDA-2019-N-4060). FDA considered public comments and incorporated the feedback as appropriate in developing the draft guidance, “Medical Devices with Indications Associated with Weight Loss—Clinical Study and Benefit-Risk Considerations.”

These draft guidances are being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). These draft guidance documents, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on “Medical Devices with Indications Associated with Weight Loss—Clinical Study and Benefit-Risk Considerations” and “Medical Devices with Indications Associated with Weight Loss—Non-Clinical Recommendations.” They do not establish any rights for any person and are not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov or https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Medical Devices with Indications Associated with Weight Loss—Clinical Study and Benefit-Risk Considerations (document number GUI00021016)” or “Medical Devices with Indications Associated with Weight Loss—Non-Clinical Recommendations (document number GUI00019046)” may send an email request to CDRH-Guidance@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number and complete title to identify the guidance you are requesting.

While this guidance contains no new collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in the following table have been approved by OMB:

Background: In 2014, HHS codified the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements (UAR) for HHS Awards at 45 CFR part 75. 79 FR 75889 (Dec. 19, 2014). This codification included HHS-specific language, including the adoption of the closeout provisions at 45 CFR 75.381. In 2020, the Office of Management and Budget modified the closeout provisions for Federal awards at 2 CFR 200.344. 85 FR 49506 (Aug. 13, 2020). These modifications:

• Increase the number of days for recipients to submit closeout reports and liquidate all financial obligations from 90 calendar days to 120 calendar days after the end of the period of performance.

• Require awarding agencies to complete closeout actions no later than one year after the end of the period of performance unless otherwise directed by authorizing statutes.

• Require awarding agencies to close out awards within one year of the end of the period of performance based on available information and report the recipient to the OMB-designated integrity and performance system (currently Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)).

The HHS-specific closeout provisions at 45 CFR 75.381 are more restrictive than 2 CFR 200.344 as modified. This may lead to recipient confusion and inconsistencies in closeout timing government-wide. Additionally, the different provisions may result in report submission delays, which can affect closeout task reconciliation and effective completion. Adhering to the 2 CFR 200.344 closeout provisions would provide more time for recipient compliance and conform with other Federal awarding agencies, thus promoting greater equity and fairness.

Action: For the reasons stated above, effective October 1, 2023, HHS will follow the 2 CFR 200.344 closeout provisions This action will minimize the burden on the internal and external grants communities while ensuring the timely closeout of HHS awards.

This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in section A.

Title of Information Collection: 24 CFR 55, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands.

OMB Approval Number: 2506-0151.

Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection:

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: 24 CFR 55 implements decision-making procedures prescribed by Executive Order 11988 with which applicants must comply before HUD financial assistance can be approved for projects that are located within floodplains. Records of compliance must be kept.

Respondents: 575.

Information Collection/Form Number: N/A.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 575.

Frequency of Response: 1.

Responses per Annum: 575.

Average Burden Hours per Response: Varies.

Total Estimated Burdens: 2,500 hours.

This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

HUD encourages interested parties to submit comments in response to these questions.

Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35.

This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

Title of Information Collection: Data Collection for HUD's Innovative Housing Showcase.

OMB Approval Number: 2528-New.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Form Number: N/A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: HUD seeks to collect information that will be used to identify exhibitors for the Innovative Housing Showcase (Showcase). HUD accepts applications for the Showcase. A template application form will streamline information collection. Below is a brief description of the Innovative Housing Showcase: The Innovative Housing Showcase (Showcase) is a public event to raise awareness of new, innovative housing technologies, especially offsite constructed or factory-built housing. HUD is seeking potential exhibitors who have developed innovative housing technologies to show their technologies to the public.

Respondents: Product manufacturers, innovators, and construction industry stakeholders.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 100.

Estimated Number of Responses: 100.

Frequency of Response: Once annually.

Average Hours per Response: 3 hours.

Total Estimated Burdens: 300 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost: The cost to respondents to complete an application is estimated at the marketing manager median hourly wage rate ($76.10) for 3 hours of work. The total estimated cost is $22,830.

This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. HUD encourages interested parties to submit comments in response to these questions.

Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507.

This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on July 13, 2023 at 88 FR 44815.

Title of Information Collection: CDBG-PRICE Competition Grant Program (Manufactured Housing Community Improvement Grant Program) Application Collection.

OMB Approval Number: 2506-PENDING.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Form Number: N/A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: HUD is issuing this NOFO under the authority of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328, enacted December 29, 2022) to collect applications for the preservation and revitalization of manufactured housing and eligible manufactured housing communities (including pre-1976 mobile homes).

Respondents: State, tribal and local governments; manufactured housing communities, cooperatives, non-profit entities, and Community Development Finance Institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 100+.

Estimated Number of Responses: 100.

Frequency of Response: 1.

Average Hours per Response: 20.

Total Estimated Burdens: 2,000.

This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

(5) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of an application for an enhancement of survival permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) for the proposed East Foundation Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement for Ocelot Reintroduction in South Texas. The application package includes the safe harbor agreement (SHA) and a draft screening form pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ).

If the requested enhancement of survival permit is approved, it would authorize East Foundation (applicant) for incidental take of the ocelot ( Leopardus (= Felis ) pardalis ) resulting from conservation and management activities covered by the SHA. With this notice, we also announce the availability of a draft screening form supporting a proposed categorical exclusion that has been prepared to evaluate the enhancement of survival permit application in accordance with NEPA requirements.

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 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.

Under an SHA, participating landowners voluntarily undertake conservation and management activities on their properties to benefit species listed under the ESA. Enhancement of survival permits are issued to applicants in association with approved SHAs to authorize take of the covered species from covered activities on the enrolled lands that are identified in the SHA. Covered activities are those otherwise lawful actions that cause take of a covered species and for which take is authorized by a permit under 50 CFR 17.22(b)-(c) 50 CFR 17.32(b)-(c), as applicable. Under an SHA, the Service may authorize incidental taking of a covered species at a level that enables the participating landowner ultimately to return the enrolled property back to agreed-upon baseline conditions. Through the SHA and the associated enhancement of survival permit, the Service also provides assurances to enrolled property owners that additional land, water, and/or natural resource use restrictions will not be imposed as a result of their voluntary conservation actions.

Application requirements and issuance criteria for enhancement of survival permits for SHAs are found at 50 CFR 17.22(d)(2)(ii) and 17.32(d)(2)(ii). See also the joint policy on SHAs, which was published in the Federal Register with the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (June 17, 1999, 64 FR 32717).

The proposed action involves the issuance of an enhancement of survival permit to the East Foundation (applicant) in association with the East Foundation Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement for Ocelot Reintroduction in South Texas. The ocelot is listed as an endangered species throughout its range in South and Central America, Mexico, and southern Texas and southern Arizona (37 FR 6476, 47 FR 31670). In Texas, ocelots are currently known to occur in coastal South Texas in two small, isolated breeding populations that total less than 100 known individuals (Service 2016).

The purpose of the proposed SHA is to expand the ocelot's occupied range in South Texas by reintroducing the species on the East Foundation's San Antonio Viejo Ranch in Jim Hogg and Starr Counties and to provide additional habitat for reintroduced ocelot dispersal onto private lands proximate to the San Antonio Viejo Ranch in Brooks, Hidalgo, Jim Hogg, Starr, and Zapata Counties. It is estimated that 362.6 square kilometers (km 2 ) (89,600 acres (ac)) of suitable ocelot habitat exist within this area, with 124.3 km 2 (30,715 ac) located on the San Antonio Viejo Ranch. Pursuant to the SHA, the East Foundation will enroll participating landowners through issuance of certificates of inclusion. The enhancement of survival permit would authorize incidental take that may result from the implementation of the proposed conservation and management activities on the enrolled properties during a 30-year permit term, with an option to return the properties to the baseline condition at the conclusion of the permit.

Proposed conservation measures include ocelot reintroduction activities, monitoring, habitat management, and research. Reintroduction activities include the construction of release enclosures, maintenance and monitoring of ocelots in these enclosures, and the actual release of behaviorally and genetically suitable ocelots from the enclosures. Such activities will be implemented in accordance with the most up-to-date version of the Ocelot Breeding and Reintroduction Manual (Ocelot Reintroduction Study Captive Propagation Team 2023) cooperatively developed by the East Foundation, Service, and other partners. Monitoring of reintroduced ocelots and their descendants will occur via geolocation devices and cameras and will allow the East Foundation to evaluate the survival and behavior of individual ocelots on the San Antonio Viejo Ranch and enrolled properties. Habitat management activities are additional, optional measures to further benefit ocelot survival in the reintroduction area. These activities may include wildfire mitigation practices, minimization of brush clearing, habitat restoration, construction of supplemental drinking sources, and potential predator or competitor control. The East Foundation, with the cooperation of partners as appropriate, may also pursue opportunities for additional research in support of ocelot reintroduction.

Proposed management practices include otherwise lawful activities such as cattle grazing, building and maintaining ranch infrastructure, agriculture operations, agritourism, vegetation and wildlife management, and energy development interests. Any negative impacts to ocelots or their habitat due to management practices are anticipated to be minimal and temporary. The ocelot reintroduction program is expected to have a net conservation benefit and contribute to recovery by supporting multiple recovery actions identified in the species' current recovery plan (Service 2016), exceeding any possible negative impacts that may occur on the San Antonio Viejo Ranch or other participating properties due to the covered and otherwise legal activities.

We will evaluate the permit application, SHA, draft screening form, and comments we receive to determine whether the SHA application meets the requirements of the ESA, NEPA, and implementing regulations. If we determine that all requirements are met, we will approve the SHA and issue the enhancement of survival permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA to the applicant in accordance with the terms of the SHA and specific terms and conditions of the authorizing permit. 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).

In accordance with the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), all information collections require approval. We may not conduct or sponsor, nor are you required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following:

(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) How the agency might 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 submission of response.

Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information (PII) in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your PII—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your PII from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Abstract: This project will collect usability data and user feedback for the purpose of updating and improving USGS Volcano Hazards Assessment (VHAs) and associated hazard communication products. This collection may take place via survey, direct interview, focus groups, listening sessions, workshops, or visual exercises such as eye-movement tracking or map annotation. Collection may be done either in-person or virtually (to reduce travel burdens). The questions asked will be consistent across all various methods of collection. This information will be used to assess partner needs with regard to the VHAs and derivative products created by the USGS Volcano Science Center and will ultimately be published in the form of white papers and journal articles as well as being used to create internal templates for the future production (and co-production) of hazard products.

Title of Collection: Next Generation Volcano Hazards Assessments.

OMB Control Number: 1028-NEW.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: New.

Respondents/Affected Public: Federal, state, local, and Tribal government officials; emergency managers; first responders; community groups; individuals/households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 500 (across all methods).

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 500.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 15 minutes to 8 hours, depending on activity.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 300 hours.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, nor are you required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) natural resource Trustees for the Open Ocean Trustee Implementation Group (Open Ocean TIG, or TIG) have prepared the Final Restoration Plan 3 and Environmental Assessment: Birds (Final RP/EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The Final RP/EA proposes alternatives to help restore birds injured by the DWH oil spill. The Final RP/EA evaluates a reasonable range of 11 project alternatives under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) and the OPA Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) regulations (15 CFR 990), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), and selects seven projects under the Birds Restoration Type for funding and implementation. A no action alternative is also evaluated pursuant to NEPA. The total estimated cost to implement the Open Ocean TIG's seven selected alternatives is approximately $33,280,000. The purpose of this notice is to inform the public of the availability of the Final RP/EA and FONSI.

On April 20, 2010, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon (DWH), which was drilling a well for BP Exploration and Production, Inc. (BP), experienced a significant explosion, fire, and subsequent sinking in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in the release of millions of barrels of oil and other discharges into the gulf. Under the authority of OPA, designated Federal and State Trustees, acting on behalf of the public, assessed the injuries to natural resources, and the services they provide, and prepared the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Final Programmatic Damage Assessment Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Final PDARP/PEIS) and subsequent record of decision (ROD), which sets forth the governance structure and process for DWH restoration planning under the OPA NRDA regulations. On April 4, 2016, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana entered a consent decree resolving civil claims by the Trustees against BP.

The Open Ocean TIG, which is composed of four Federal agencies—the Department of the Interior, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Department of Agriculture—selects and implements restoration projects within the TIG's Restoration Area in accordance with the consent decree. The PDARP/PEIS, ROD, consent decree, and information on the DWH Trustees can be found at https://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov/restoration-planning/gulf-plan .

On March 25, 2021, the Open Ocean TIG issued a notice of solicitation on the Gulf Spill Restoration website requesting project ideas for the Sturgeon and Birds Restoration Types. On March 11, 2022, the TIG announced they had reviewed project idea submissions and initiated drafting an RP/EA, which would include a reasonable range of restoration alternatives (projects) for the Birds Restoration Type.

The TIG released the Draft RP/EA for public review and comment on March 14, 2023, and published a notice of availability in the Federal Register (88 FR 15734). The comment period ran through April 28, 2023. To facilitate public understanding of the document, the TIG held webinars on March 28 and April 4, 2023, during which public comments were solicited. After the public review period closed, the TIG reviewed the comments received, prepared responses to those comments, finalized the plan, and prepared a FONSI.

In the Final RP/EA, the Open Ocean TIG analyzes a reasonable range of 11 alternatives and, pursuant to NEPA, a no action alternative. The TIG's seven preferred alternatives, listed below, were selected for funding and implementation.

Funding to implement the selected alternatives will come from the Birds restoration allocation. The total estimated cost to implement the seven selected alternatives is approximately $33,280,000. Restoration planning in the Open Ocean Restoration Area will continue.

The Administrative Record for the Final RP/EA can be viewed electronically at https://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/adminrecord under folder 6.5.2.2.3.

The authority for this action is the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq. ), its implementing Natural Resource Damage Assessment regulations found at 15 CFR 990, and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations found at 40 CFR 1500-1508.

The BLM's purpose for the action is to respond to Nevada Vanadium Company's (NVV) proposal, as described in its proposed Plan of Operations, and to analyze the potential environmental effects associated with the Proposed Action, which is the operator's proposed Plan of Operations, and alternatives to the Proposed Action. NEPA mandates that the BLM evaluate the potential effects of the Proposed Action and develop alternatives. The BLM's need for the action is established by the BLM's responsibilities under section 302 of FLPMA and the BLM Surface Management Regulations at 43 CFR subpart 3809 to respond to a proposed Plan of Operations and ensure that operations prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the public lands.

Under the proposed Plan of Operations, NVV would construct and operate an open pit mine in the southern extent of the Fish Creek Range. Facilities associated with the Proposed Action include development of an open pit mine, rock disposal area, crushing facilities and stockpile, heap leach pad, process facility, process and make-up water ponds, borrow areas, mine and access roads, water and power supply lines, and ancillary facilities. The estimated project life consists of 1.5 years of construction, 7 years of operation, 4 years of active reclamation and closure, and up to 30 years of post-closure monitoring. In addition, NVV would complete exploration operations as part of the proposed Plan of Operations. The project area includes a total of 6,456 acres of BLM-administered public lands, of which approximately 806 acres of surface disturbance would occur due to project-related operations. No state or private lands are included in the project area. The operator would reclaim surface disturbances under the Proposed Action and would prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands. Final reclamation of the project area would occur at the end the project although every effort would be made to identify concurrent reclamation opportunities during the life of the operation.

The South Access Road Alternative would include the same mine components as described for the Proposed Action, except the access road would be constructed in a different location. This alternative access road would be approximately 7 miles long and extend from County Road M-103 (Duckwater Road) to the project area. The access road would be constructed parallel to the power line corridor. Overall, this alternative would result in approximately 38 additional acres of surface disturbance relative to the Proposed Action. Total surface disturbance would include 844 acres of BLM-administered land. Post-reclamation topography would be similar to that of the Proposed Action, except the access road would be in a different location.

The Renewable Energy Alternative would consist of the same overall operations as described for the Proposed Action except this alternative would include supporting the mine operations with a combination of renewable energy sources and a utility interconnection with future large-scale battery storage. This alternative would include the installation of a solar energy facility with enough solar electric photovoltaic capacity for the site to become a net generation facility with battery storage able to perform peak smoothing and daily load management.

This alternative would result in approximately 33 additional acres of surface disturbance compared to the Proposed Action. Total surface disturbance for the Renewable Energy Alternative would include 839 acres of public lands.

Under the No Action Alternative, the BLM would not authorize the Plan of Operations, and the operations described in the Proposed Action would not occur. Mineral resources would remain undeveloped, and the construction and operation of the proposed mine and associated facilities would not occur.

Based on the analyses contained in the EIS for the proposed Gibellini Vanadium Mine Project, and after carefully considering input received from the public and cooperating agencies, the BLM has selected the Renewable Energy Alternative as the BLM's environmentally preferred alternative.

Public comments on the Draft EIS received and internal BLM review were considered and incorporated as appropriate into the Final EIS. Public comments resulted in the addition of clarifying text but did not significantly change the impact analyses.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we provide the public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

A FederalRegister notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on (87 FR 73776) on December 1, 2022. We received the following comments in response to that Notice:

I'd like to comment on the proposal to require permits for climbing in national parks. It's hard to determine whether this proposal means climbers would be required to get permits in advance, and whether there would be limits on the number of permits available for a given day. If there is a limit on how many are available on a given day, I am concerned that the addition of permits would cause fewer climbers to abandon or reschedule their climbs due to weather, and we would see an increase in injuries, rescues, and fatalities occurring in national parks. This could be mitigated by reducing the time in advance that permits could be acquired ( e.g., cannot get permits more than 4 days in advance), but that presents its own challenges.

There are already cases where a permit is a de facto requirement for doing a climb, such as those where backcountry camping is necessary for most non-professional climbers. In my experience, this hasn't been an issue (there have been enough sites available that it was possible to get a site the day of), but since so many climbs require early starts (6 a.m. or earlier), day-of permits would be pretty challenging to do. It would also be good to link those sorts of campsites, like the lower saddle of the Grand Teton, with the climbing permits in some way so people don't end up with one and not the other.

If it's simply a sign-in sheet at the trailhead, that seems very reasonable and I have no concerns. My only other question is what the cutoff grade for climbing would be—all off-trail travel, class 3 or 4 or higher, or roped vs un-roped? Either way, being able to do the permit at the trailhead or online would be a great idea.

During the 60-day Federal Register comment period, the National Park Service proposed creating a new Form 10-404C that intends to renew the current Backcountry/Wilderness related to permitting fixed anchors in the wilderness. After review and consultation, the NPS will not add the new form to the collection.

A three-page letter (attached in ROCIS) submitted in PDF format was submitted expressing the State of Alaska's viewpoints regarding a proposed new form 10-404C—Application to install fixed anchors in the wilderness.

During the 60-day Federal Register comment period, the National Park Service proposed creating a new Form 10-404C. After review and consultation, the NPS will not add the new form to the collection.

A four-page letter (attached) was submitted expressing viewpoints and concerns regarding creating an application form regarding a proposed new form 10-404C—Application to install fixed anchors in the wilderness installation of fixed anchors in the wilderness.

During the 60-day Federal Register comment period, the National Park Service proposed creating a new Form 10-404C. After review and consultation, the NPS will not add the new form to the collection.

As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following:

(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility.

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

(4) How might the agency 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 submission of response.

Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you 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.

Abstract: The Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit is an extension of the NPS statutory authority and responsibility to protect the park areas it administers and to manage the public use thereof (54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, and 320102). In 1976, the NPS initiated a backcountry registration system by the regulations codified in 36 CFR 1.5, 1.6, and 2.10. The NPS regulations codified in 36 CFR parts 1 through 7, 12, and 13 are designated to implement statutory mandates that provide for resource protection and public enjoyment. The registration system aims to provide users access to backcountry and wilderness areas of national parks while enhancing the protection of natural and cultural resources by using better management practices by the park management. Data collected through the registration process serves as an important resource that informs backcountry/wilderness management and stewardship planning, decision-making, and operations, and provides a means of disseminating public safety and outdoor ethics messages regarding backcountry/wilderness travel and camping along with continuing opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. Permitting enhances the ability of the NPS to educate users on potential hazards, search and rescue efforts, and resource protection. The objectives of the permit system carried out by park managers are to ensure:

(1) Requests by backcountry users are evaluated by park managers per applicable statutes and NPS regulations.

(2) The use of consistent standards and permitting criteria throughout the agency.

(3) To the extent possible, the use of a single and efficient permitting document, NPS Forms 10-404 Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Application and 10-404A Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Hangtag are used to provide access to NPS backcountry areas, including areas that require a reservation to enter where use limits are imposed per other NPS regulations. The 10-404AK Alaska Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Application, is used within Alaskan park units, Denali National Park and Preserve and Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, due to unique, park-specific requirements like the additional permitted methods of travel as regulated by ANILCA Section 1110(a).

We've decided to not add the previously proposed (in the 60-day FRN publication) new form 10-404C Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Application for Climbing to this collection, upon consideration of the comments received during the 60-day comment period.

Title of Collection: Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit, 36 CFR 1.5, 1.6, and 2.10.

OMB Control Number: 1024-0022.

Form Number: NPS Forms 10-404 Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Application, 10-404A Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Hangtag, 10-404AK Alaska Backcountry/Wilderness Use Permit Application.

Type of Review: Renewal of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals, private sector, and state, local, or tribal government entities applying to use backcountry and wilderness areas within units of the national park system.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 473,872.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 5 minutes to 8 minutes depending on the activity.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 51,337.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor nor is a person required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the PMAE. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the PMAE.

Human remains representing, at minimum, 43 individuals were removed from Los Angeles County, CA. In 1877, Paul Schumacher led an expedition on behalf of the PMAE to the Channel Islands. Schumacher removed the human remains from an area he described as “Graves at the Isthmus” on Santa Catalina Island. The 15 associated funerary objects are one bone awl; one lot consisting of glass and shell beads; one lot consisting of brass buttons and glass and shell beads; one lot consisting of shell beads and faunal fragments; one lot consisting of fragmentary faunal remains; one lot consisting of a copper cup, cloth, basket fragments, and a string of beads; and nine bags of shells beads.

Human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from Los Angeles County, CA. During the 1877 expedition, Schumacher removed the human remains from an area he identified as Johnson's Place on Santa Catalina Island. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from Los Angeles County, CA. As part of the same 1877 expedition, Schumacher removed the human remains from an area he identified as Pots Valley on Santa Catalina Island. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, 23 individuals were removed from Los Angeles County, CA. In 1877, Paul Schumacher visited San Clemente Island as part of the PMAE expedition and removed the human remains from unknown locations on San Clemente Island. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, five individuals were removed from Los Angeles County, CA. In 1878, Paul Schumacher led an expedition on behalf of the PMAE to the Channel Islands. During this expedition, he removed the human remains from a place he identified as Whitney's Place on Santa Catalina Island. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was removed from San Nicolas Island in Ventura County, CA, at an unknown date. Mrs. Thomas Bishop donated the human remains to the PMAE in 1907. Bishop likely acquired the human remains from Paul Schumacher after one of his expeditions to San Nicolas Island between 1875 and 1878. No known associated funerary objects are present.

The human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of evidence were used to reasonably trace the relationship: oral traditional, geographical, biological, kinship, and archeological.

Oral tradition, geographical, biological, kinship, and archeological evidence indicate the southern Channel Islands are culturally affiliated to the mainland coastal groups that are known in the anthropological record as the Luiseño, Chumash, and Gabrielino peoples. (The Gabrielino, a nonfederally recognized Indian group, are related linguistically to the Luiseño.)

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the PMAE has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 76 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 15 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians, California; Pala Band of Mission Indians; Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation, California; Pechanga Band of Indians ( Previously listed as Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California); Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians ( Previously listed as Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of Rincon Reservation, California); Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of the Santa Ynez Reservation, California; and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, California.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of PMAE. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by PMAE.

In 1959 and 1960, the human remains of, at minimum, six individuals were removed by Cynthia Irwin-Williams and Henry Irwin from the Magic Mountain site (5JF223), in Jefferson County, CO, during field excavations undertaken on behalf of Harvard University. The six associated funerary objects are three shell beads, one shell fragment, one lot consisting of charcoal and dirt, and one lot consisting of faunal remain fragments.

Sometime prior to 1960, the human remains of, at minimum, three individuals were removed by amateur archeologist Jack Putnam from the Magic Mountain site (5JF223) in Jefferson County, CO. These human remains were donated by Putnam to PMAE at an unknown date. The 10 associated funerary objects are one antler fragment, two chipped stone flakes, one organic floral remain, and six faunal remain fragments.

In 1940, the human remains of, at minimum, one individual were removed by Harold A. and Betty H. Huscher of the Colorado Museum of Natural History (now Denver Museum of Nature and Science) from the Magic Mountain Site (5JF223) in Jefferson County, CO. In 1960 or later, the human remains came into the possession of PMAE. The one associated funerary object is a faunal remain fragment.

The human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice were removed from a known geographic location. This location is the aboriginal lands of one or more Indian Tribes. The following information was used to identify the aboriginal land: a final judgment of the Indian Claims Commission and a treaty.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes, the PMAE has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 10 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 17 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• No relationship of shared group identity can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any Indian Tribe.

• The human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice were removed from the aboriginal land of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma; Northern Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana.

Written requests for disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for disposition may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization, or who shows that the requestor is an aboriginal land Indian Tribe.

Disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for disposition are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to disposition. Requests for joint disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9 and 10.11.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the USFWS. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the USFWS.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Unland Site (41CF111) at Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge, in Cameron County, TX. On or around August 10, 1976, human remains belonging to three individuals were uncovered during construction. Sometime prior to November 16, 1990, the remains of these individuals were transferred to an unrecorded Indian Tribe and were reburied. However, fragmentary human remains that had been transferred to the Texas Historical Commission still remained in their custody. On March 12, 2001, a long bone fragment belonging to one of the reburied individuals and several associated funerary objects were found at the Texas Historical Commission. The five associated funerary objects are three lots consisting of organic burial matrixes; one turtle shell; and one lot consisting of clay balls.

The human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: oral traditional.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the USFWS has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.

• The five objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the USFWS must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The USFWS is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the PMAE. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the PMAE.

In 1972, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from the Trudeau Site (LMS 29-J-1) in West Feliciana Parish, LA, by Jeffrey P. Brain as part of the Lower Mississippi Survey Expedition. At that time, the Survey Expedition was a project of Harvard University. No associated funerary objects are present.

Based on Native American ceramics, glass beads, and European objects recovered from LMS 29-J-1, the Trudeau site is known to have been the primary village and cemetery of the Tunica people from 1731 through 1764. Historical, ethnohistorical, and oral historical evidence summarized by Mr. Brain in his publication, Tunica Archaeology, support the proposition that the present-day descendants of the 18th century Tunica are the Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe of Louisiana.

The human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: anthropological, archeological, geographical, historical, and oral tradition.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the PMAE has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of two individuals of Native American ancestry.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains described in this notice and the Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Illinois State Museum. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the Illinois State Museum.

Between 1956 and 1957, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Jerry Long Cave site in Ralls County, MO. In 1957, faunal remains from this site were transferred to the Illinois State Museum for analysis. During that analysis, fragmentary human remains were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. These human remains are likely pre-contact in date.

Between 1961 and 1962, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Tick Creek Cave site (23PH145) in Phelps County, MO. In 1963, faunal remains from this site were transferred to the Illinois State Museum for analysis. During that analysis, fragmentary human remains were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. Tick Creek Cave dates from the Late Archaic through the Woodland period.

Sometime prior to 1967, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from an unknown location in St. Louis County, MO. These human remains were part of the Dickson Pathology Collection formerly used in exhibits at Dickson Mounds Museum. In 1967, these human remains were purchased from a private citizen by the Illinois State Museum. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are pre-contact in date.

In 1961, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Goat Bluff Cave (also known as Bruce Cave) in Pulaski County, MO, during an archaeological survey. In 2007, the human remains were transferred to the Illinois State Museum. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are pre-contact in date.

Sometime in the 1970s, human remains representing, at minimum, six individuals were removed from an unknown location in Pulaski County, MO. In 2014, these human remains were transferred by a private citizen to the Illinois State Museum. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are pre-contact in date.

Sometime prior to 1977, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from a location near Fredericktown, in Madison County, MO. In 2016, these human remains were transferred by a private citizen to the Illinois State Museum. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are pre-contact in date.

Sometime between 1960 and 1984, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Carroll Cave, in Camden County, MO, by the University of Central Missouri. In 1985, a collection of faunal remains known as the Hawksley Collection of vertebrate paleontological specimens was transferred to the Illinois State Museum geology department. In 2023, human remains were discovered in this paleontological collection and were transferred to the Illinois State Museum anthropology department. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are pre-contact in date.

The human remains in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: anthropological, archeological, geographical, historical, and oral traditional.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the Illinois State Museum has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 19 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains described in this notice and The Osage Nation.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Illinois State Museum must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Illinois State Museum is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the University of California, Riverside. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the University of California, Riverside.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Riverside, CA. In 1980, members of the UCR Archaeological Research Unit and the Archaeological Resource Management Corporation conducted excavations ahead of the construction of a flood channel in the La Quinta area of the Central Coachella Valley. The sites excavated included CA-RIV-1180, CA-RIV-119, CA-RIV-158, CA-RIV-1174, CA-RIV-1770, and CA-RIV-1838. CA-RIV-1180, or the La Quinta Cove Site, is an area well-known to contain ancestral Cahuilla cremation burials. The collections associated with the excavations were subsequently curated by the UCR Archaeological Curation Unit. In 2021, during analysis of the faunal skeletal remains in the collections, human remains were identified. Subsequent consultation with tribal representatives from multiple Cahuilla Bands resulted in the identification of funerary objects within the same collection. The 10 associated funerary objects are one lot consisting of ceramics, one lot consisting of lithics, one lot consisting of metal, one lot consisting of shell beads, one lot consisting of animal bones, one lot consisting of botanical material, one lot consisting of fire-altered rock, one lot consisting of geological materials, one lot consisting of unmodified shells, and one lot consisting of mineralogical objects.

The human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: anthropological, archeological, biological, geographical, historical, oral traditional, and expert tribal opinion.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the University of California, Riverside has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.

• The 10 lots of objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, California.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of California, Riverside must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of California, Riverside is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the BIA. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the BIA.

Sometime prior to 1938, a coffin was removed from Neah Bay on the Makah Reservation, in Clallam County, WA, by Captain Fred W. Griffiths. In 1938, it was accessioned by the Karshner Museum and Center for Culture & Arts.

The associated funerary object in this notice is connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following type of information was used to reasonably trace the relationship: geographical.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the BIA has determined that:

• The one object described in this notice is reasonably believed to have been made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the associated funerary object described in this notice and the Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation.

Written requests for repatriation of the associated funerary object in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the associated funerary object in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the BIA must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the associated funerary object are considered a single request and not competing requests. The BIA is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

Authority : Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the UWM. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records held by the UWM.

In 1972 and 1979, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed during an archeological surface survey by UWM of the Dusty Rhodes site (11-HE-14) in Henderson County, IL. The site dates to the Middle Woodland Havana/Hopewell (A.D. 0 to 400) and Late Woodland (A.D. 600 to 1200) periods. After completion of the survey, these human remains were transferred to UWM. The one associated funerary object is one lot consisting of faunal skeletal elements, a projectile point, bifaces, lithic debitage, pottery sherds, and shell fragments.

The human remains and associated funerary object in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: geographical, historical, oral traditional, and expert opinion.

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, the UWM has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of three individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The one object described in this notice is reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow Creek Reservation, South Dakota; Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South Dakota; Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma; Lower Sioux Indian Community in the State of Minnesota; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma; Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation; Prairie Island Indian Community in the State of Minnesota; Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska; Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Minnesota; The Osage Nation; and the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska.

Written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary object in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by:

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

2. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary object in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after October 16, 2023. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the UWM must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary object are considered a single request and not competing requests. The UWM is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9, 10.10, and 10.14.

In accordance with the PRA and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on September 12, 2022 (87 FR 55847). No comments were received.

As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we are again soliciting comments from the public and other Federal agencies on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following:

(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility.

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

(4) How might the agency 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 submission of response.

Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. 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.

Abstract: The United States Park Police (USPP) collects information from applicants during the Pre-employment Suitability Determination Phase as part of the application process for consideration as a candidate for park police positions. The USPP is authorized by Title 5, CFR, Section 5.2, “Investigation and evaluations,” to collect information as required in the USPP Pre-employment Suitability Process. The USPP uses the forms described below as a part of the application process required to conduct an OPM background investigation.

Form 10-2201, “Personal Qualifications Statement”—provides information on the personal history of the candidate.

Form 10-2201A, “Information Release Form”—authorizes the release of all personal and confidential records, including medical records concerning physical and mental health.

Form 10-2201B, “Release to Obtain a Credit Report”—authorizes the release of information from consumer reporting agencies.

Form 10-2201C, “Lautenberg Certification”—requires information and certification by the applicant regarding a conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Form 10-2201D, “Physical Efficiency Battery Waiver”—requires the candidate to provide information regarding medical conditions which may impede their ability to meet the minimum efficiency score on the Physical Efficiency Battery (PEB).

Form 10-2201E (Removed)—Physician Consent Form—This form is no longer necessary. The USPP Pre-Employment Physical Efficiency Battery (PEB) does not require a physician to clear or medically qualify the applicant for basic physical activity. Applicants can make the determination themselves if they are medically fit enough to participate in the PEB.

Form 10-2201F (Removed) Applicant Documentation Form—This form is no longer necessary. Applicants defer or decline USPP's offer of employment through email to NPS Human Resources.

Title of Collection: United States Park Police Pre-Employment Suitability Determination Process.

OMB Control Number: 1024-0245.

Form Number: NPS Forms 10-2201, 10-2201A, 10-2201B, 10-2201C, 10-2201D.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Candidates for employment as a United States Park Police Officer.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1,250.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1,250.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 5 minutes to 7 hours (times vary depending upon the activity).

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,897.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $26,750 (printing, notarizing, and providing supporting documentation).

An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, BOEM provides the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps BOEM assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand BOEM's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

BOEM is soliciting comments on the proposed ICR described below. BOEM is especially interested in public comments addressing the following issues: (1) is the collection necessary to the proper functions of BOEM; (2) what can BOEM do to ensure that this information is processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the burden estimate accurate; (4) how might BOEM enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might BOEM minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including minimizing the burden through the use of information technology?

Comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. BOEM will include or summarize each comment in its ICR to OMB for approval of this information collection. You should be aware that your entire comment—including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information included in your comment—may be made publicly available at any time.

For BOEM to consider withholding from disclosure your personally identifiable information, you must identify, in a cover letter, any information contained in your comment that, if released, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of your privacy. You must also briefly describe any possible harmful consequences of the disclosure of information, such as embarrassment, injury, or other harm.

Even if BOEM withholds your personally identifiable information in the context of this ICR, your comment is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552). Your information will only be withheld if a determination is made that one of the FOIA exemptions to disclosure applies. Such a determination will be made in accordance with the DOI's FOIA implementing regulations (43 CFR part 2) and applicable law.

BOEM will make available for public inspection all comments in their entirety (except privileged or confidential information) submitted by organizations and businesses, or by individuals identifying themselves as representatives of organizations or businesses. BOEM protects privileged and confidential information in accordance with FOIA and the DOI's implementing regulations.

Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 550, subpart C, “Pollution Prevention and Control.”

Abstract: Section 5(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), as amended (43 U.S.C. 1334(a)), authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to prescribe rules and regulations to manage the energy and mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Such rules and regulations apply to all operations conducted under a lease, right-of-use and easement, and pipeline right-of-way.

Section 5(a)(8) of OCSLA requires that regulations prescribed by the Secretary include provisions “for compliance with the national ambient air quality standards pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. ), to the extent that activities authorized under this subchapter significantly affect the air quality of any State.” This information collection renewal concerns information that is submitted to BOEM under 30 CFR part 550, subpart C, “Pollution Prevention and Control,” which implements section 5(a)(8), and related notices to lessees and operators (NTLs), which clarify and provide additional, nonbinding guidance on aspects of the regulations. BOEM uses this information to inform its decisions on plan approval, to ensure operations are conducted according to all applicable regulations and plan conditions of approval, and to inform State and regional planning organizations' modeling efforts.

BOEM prepares an emission inventory every 3 years to help ensure that its regulations comply with section 5(a)(8) of OCSLA and to implement the requirements at 30 CFR 550.303(k) and 550.304(g). These emission inventories provide the essential input that BOEM needs to assess the impacts of OCS oil and gas activity on the States as mandated by the OCSLA. Also, these inventories provide the States with essential information needed to perform their implementation plan demonstrations to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Finally, these inventories provide operators with essential data for their mandatory reporting of greenhouse gases to the USEPA.

BOEM began planning for the 2023 OCS emissions inventory by issuing NTL No. 2022-N01 on October 1, 2022. The NTL instructed lessees and operators on submitting information about their facility operations, as required by OCSLA and BOEM's regulations, through BOEM's web-based emissions reporting tool, the Air Quality System (AQS). AQS allows operators to submit their facility activity data electronically into the system, instantaneously calculates monthly and annual emissions, assures and controls data quality, generates reports such as emission inventory reports, and creates data graphics including geographic information system maps for operators and BOEM. AQS makes it easy for users to enter activity data, calculate emissions data in real-time, and leverage built-in validation features to quality check calculations prior to submission.

OMB Control Number: 1010-0057.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Potential respondents comprise Federal OCS oil and gas or sulfur lessees and operators and States.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 807 responses.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 51,080 hours.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to retain or obtain a benefit.

Frequency of Collection: Every 3 years.

Total Estimated Annual Non-Hour Burden Cost: None.

The following table details the individual BOEM information collections under OMB Control Number 1010-0057 and respective hour burden estimates for this ICR.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

Proposed Action: Empire Wind seeks approval to construct, operate, and maintain the Project: a wind energy facility and its associated export cables on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) offshore New York. The Project would be developed within the range of design parameters outlined in the Empire Wind COP, subject to applicable mitigation measures. Empire Wind proposes to develop the lease area in two wind farms, known as Empire Wind 1 (EW 1) and Empire Wind 2 (EW 2) (collectively, the Project). EW 1 and EW 2 will be independent from each other. In total, Empire Wind proposes constructing and operating up to 147 wind turbines and up to 2 offshore substations with 2 cable routes under the terms of Renewable Energy Lease OCS-A 0512.

The Project is located 14 statute miles from Long Island, New York, and 19.5 statute miles from Long Branch, New Jersey. The onshore components of the Project will include up to three export cable landfalls in New York (one for EW 1 and up to two for EW 2) and two onshore substations: EW 1 onshore substation in Brooklyn, New York; and EW 2 onshore substation in either Oceanside, New York, Island Park, New York, or both.

Alternatives: BOEM considered 30 alternatives when preparing the FEIS and carried forward 7 alternatives for further analysis in the FEIS. These seven alternatives include six action alternatives and the no action alternative. Twenty-three alternatives were rejected because they did not meet the purpose and need for the proposed action or did not meet screening criteria, which are presented in FEIS section 2.2. The screening criteria included consistency with law and regulations; technical and economic feasibility; environmental impact; and geographic considerations.

Availability of the FEIS: The FEIS, Empire Wind COP, and associated information are available on BOEM's website at: https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/empire-wind. BOEM has distributed digital copies of the FEIS to all parties listed in FEIS appendix K. If you require a digital copy on a flash drive or a paper copy, BOEM will provide one upon request, as long as these materials are available. You may request a flash drive or paper copy of the FEIS by contacting Brandi Sangunett at (703) 787-1015 or brandi.sangunett@boem.gov.

Cooperating Agencies: The following Federal agencies and State and city governmental entities participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the FEIS: Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; National Marine Fisheries Service; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; U.S. Coast Guard; Maritime Administration; National Park Service; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; New York State Department of State; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; New York State Energy Research and Development Authority; and New York City Mayor's Office of Environmental Coordination. The following Federal and Tribal entities participated as participating agencies in the preparation of the FEIS: The Shinnecock Indian Nation; Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah), Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe of Indians, Stockbridge-Munsee Community Band of Mohican Indians, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Department of Defense, and Department of the Navy.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4231 et seq. (NEPA, as amended) and 40 CFR 1506.6.

Section 3405(e) of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (title 34 Pub. L. 102-575) requires the Secretary of the Interior to, among other things, “develop criteria for evaluating the adequacy of all water conservation plans” developed by certain contractors. According to section 3405(e)(1), these criteria must promote “the highest level of water use efficiency reasonably achievable by project contractors using best available cost-effective technology and best management practices.” In accordance with this legislative mandate, Reclamation developed and published the Standard Criteria, which is updated every 3 years.

Public Disclosure. We invite the public to comment on our preliminary ( i.e., draft) 2023 Standard Criteria. 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.