The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16 U.S.C. 6803(b)) requires the Forest Service to publish a six-month advance notice in the Federal Register of establishment of new recreation fee sites. In accordance with Forest Service Handbook 2309.13, chapter 30, the Forest Service will publish the proposed new recreation fee site in local newspapers and other local publications for public comment. Most of the new recreation fee revenues would be spent where they are collected to enhance the visitor experience at the new recreation fee site.

A standard amenity recreation fee of $5 per day per vehicle would be charged at Big Pine Flat Off-Highway Vehicle Staging Area. The Adventure Pass and the America the Beautiful—the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass would be honored at this standard amenity recreation fee site.

Expenditures from recreation fee revenues collected at the new recreation fee site would enhance recreation opportunities, improve customer service, and address maintenance needs. Once public involvement is complete, the new fee will be reviewed by a Recreation Resource Advisory Committee prior to a final decision and implementation.

The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16 U.S.C. 6803(b)) requires the Forest Service to publish a six-month advance notice in the Federal Register of establishment of new recreation fee sites. In accordance with Forest Service Handbook 2309.13, chapter 30, the Forest Service will publish the proposed new recreation fee sites in local newspapers and other local publications for public comment. Most of the new recreation fee revenues would be spent where they are collected to enhance the visitor experience at the new recreation fee sites.

An expanded amenity recreation fee of $50 per night for groups up to 50 people would be charged for the Yates Place Camp Group Campground. A standard amenity recreation fee of $5 per day per vehicle would be charged at Cedar Point Day and Flanners Beach developed recreation sites. The America the Beautiful—the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass would be honored at these standard amenity recreation fee sites. A special recreation permit fee of $5 per rider per day or a $30 annual pass is proposed for the Jackrabbit, Wood Run, and Pisgah Complex Trail Systems.

Expenditures from recreation fee revenues collected at the new recreation fee sites would enhance recreation opportunities, improve customer service, and address maintenance needs. Once public involvement is complete, the new recreation fees will be reviewed by a Recreation Resource Advisory Committee prior to a final decision and implementation. Reservations for group campgrounds could be made online at www.recreation.gov or by calling 877-444-6777. Reservations would cost $8.00 per reservation.

This meeting is available to the public through the Zoom link above. If joining only via phone, callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind and hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the call-in number found through registering at the web link provided above for the meeting.

Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the respective meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Victoria Moreno at vmoreno@usccr.gov. All written comments received will be available to the public.

Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (202) 809-9618. Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at the www.facadatabase.gov. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above phone number or email address.

Agenda: Wednesday, November 29, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. (CT)

Members of the public may listen to the discussions through the above call-in numbers (audio only) or online registration links (audio/visual). An open comment period at each meeting will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind, and/or hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and meeting ID number.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meetings. Written comments may be emailed to Victoria at vmoreno@usccr.gov.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Records of the meetings will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Nebraska Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

On February 2, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the AD order on shrimp from India for the POR, February 1, 2022, through January 31, 2023. 1 In February 2022, Commerce received timely requests, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), to conduct an administrative review of this AD order from the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (the petitioner), 2 the American Shrimp Processors Association (ASPA), 3 and certain individual companies. 4 Based on these requests, on April 11, 2023, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation listing 269 companies for which Commerce received timely requests for review. 5

In July 2023, all interested parties timely withdrew their requests for an administrative review of certain companies. 6 These companies are listed in Appendix I.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, certain parties withdrew their requests for review by the 90-day deadline. Accordingly, we are rescinding this administrative review with respect to the companies listed in Appendix I.

Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register .

This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

On July 7, 2023, Commerce published the preliminary results of the 2021-2022 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel (cold-drawn mechanical tubing) from India, covering two producers/exporters, Goodluck and TII. 1 For the events that occurred since Commerce published the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The merchandise subject to the Order is cold-drawn mechanical tubing from India. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 7304.31.3000, 7304.31.6050, 7304.51.1000, 7304.51.5005, 7304.51.5060, 7306.30.5015, 7306.30.5020, and 7306.50.5030. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7306.30.1000 and 7306.50.1000. The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the Order is dispositive. A full description of the scope of the Order is contained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

All issues raised by parties in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is included in the appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade/gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Based on our analysis of the comments received and our verification findings, Commerce made certain revisions to the margin calculations for Goodluck and TII. The Issues and Decision Memorandum contains descriptions of these revisions.

We determine that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exists for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b). Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where the respondent reported the entered value of its U.S. sales, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. Where the respondent did not report entered value, we calculated importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total quantity of those sales. Where an importer-specific assessment rate is de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent), the entries by that importer will be liquidated without regard to antidumping duties. To determine whether an importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rate is de minimis, we calculated an estimated entered value.

Consistent with Commerce's clarification of its assessment practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Goodluck or TII for which they did not know the merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 5

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of cold-drawn mechanical tubing from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Goodluck and TII will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established for each company in the final results of the review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior completed segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the completed segment for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the completed segment for the most recent period for the producer of the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 5.87 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation in this proceeding. 6 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties, and/or an increase in the amount of antidumping duties by the amount of the countervailing duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing these results of administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq. ).

The applicant requests a 5 year permit to study northern elephant seals in California including Piedras Blancas, Gorda, Vandenberg Air Force Base, and the Channel Islands. Research would be conducted year-round on all age classes and both sexes, with increased frequency and effort during the breeding season (December-April). Research will include behavioral observations, acoustics recordings and playbacks, marking, unmanned aircraft systems, capture, measurements, instrumentation, ultrasound, and sampling (blood, scat, urine, swabs, fur, vibrissae) for health monitoring and research. Two unintentional mortality takes are requested per year not to exceed five over the duration of the permit. In addition, salvage, import, export, and receipt of pinniped parts (any species) is requested for scientific research. The following species may also be unintentionally harassed during research: California sea lions ( Zalophus californianus ), harbor seals ( Phoca vitulina ), and northern fur seals ( Callorhinus ursinus ). See the take table for complete numbers of animals requested by species, life stage, and procedure.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register , NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA; 5 U.S.C. 10), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b), and 41 CFR 102-3.150.

Purpose of the Meeting: The ACANC provides independent advice and recommendations to the Secretary of the Army independent advice and recommendations on matters related to ANC, including, but not limited to, cemetery administration, the erection of memorials at the cemetery, and master planning for the cemetery. The Secretary of the Army may act on the Committee's advice and recommendations.

Agenda: The Committee will receive a year-in-review briefing regarding ANC, review a road-designation proposal based on the congressional mandate to implement all Naming Commission recommendations, and review a commemorative works proposal for the Protestant and Catholic Chaplains Monuments in the context of Public Law 117-81, Section 584.

Public's Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to FACA and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, this meeting is open to the public.

Procedures for Attendance and Public Comment: To attend this meeting, contact Mr. Matthew Davis, the ADFO. (See the information listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; email is preferred.) Individuals will be asked to submit their full name, organization, email address, and phone number to attend. Public attendance will be via physical presence.

For additional information about public access procedures, contact Mr. Matthew Davis, the ADFO. (See the information listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; email is preferred.)

Written Comments and Statements: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1009(a)(3), 41 CFR 102-3.105(j), and 41 CFR 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the ACANC either in response to the stated agenda of the open meeting or regarding the ACANC's mission in general. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Mr. Matthew Davis, the ADFO. (See the information listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; email is preferred.) Each page of the comment or statement must include the author's name, title or affiliation, address, and daytime phone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the ADFO at least seven business days prior to the meeting to be considered by the ACANC. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the ACANC until its next meeting. The DFO will review all timely written comments or statements with the ACANC Chairperson and will ensure such comments or statements are provided to all ACANC members before the meeting.

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140d, the ACANC is not obligated to allow any member of the public to speak or otherwise address the ACANC during the meeting. Members of the public may be permitted to make verbal comments during these meetings and if allowed, verbal comments may only be made at the time and in the manner described below. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, the individual must submit a request to the ADFO with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment. (See the information listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; email is preferred.) The request must be submitted to the ADFO at least three business days before the meeting. The ADFO will log each request in the order received. In consultation with the Chairperson(s), the DFO will determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the ACANC mission and/or to the agenda of this public meeting. Members of the public who asked to make a verbal comment and whose comments are deemed relevant under the process described above will be invited to speak in the order in which the ADFO received their request. The appropriate Chairperson(s) may allot a specific amount of time for verbal comments.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: ArmyFit Program Azimuth Check Survey; OMB Control Number: 0702-AFIT.

Type of Request: New.

Number of Respondents: 500,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 500,000.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 125,000.

Needs and Uses: This collection supports the mission of the Army Resiliency Directorate (ARD), HQDA G-1, to improve the readiness of the force and quality of life for the soldiers. ARD owns the Army Fitness Platform (ArmyFit). ArmyFit hosts the Global Assessment Tool (GAT), which is an assessment promoting self-development through its user feedback and enables the creation of a customized ArmyFit profile that directs individuals to tailored self-development and training resources for soldiers, their families, and Army civilians. The Family GAT is a self-appraisal survey for assessing an individual's fitness in dimensions of strength: physical, emotional, social, spiritual, and family. It is a tool for building resilience. The survey is taken by all Soldiers and offered to family members, Department of the Army Civilians, and contractors.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation : Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DoD Clearance Officer: Ms. Angela Duncan.

Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Duncan at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: NDU Foreign Delegation Visit Request; OMB Control Number 0704-0600.

Needs and Uses: Foreign delegation visits help to conduct analysis for regional and DoD academic accreditations, create reports for University leadership to aid in the development of effective curricula, and facilitate academic completion requirements. The foreign visit request form is primarily used to collect information on visiting delegations for protocol purposes and to ensure proper logistic support for the visiting delegation. The respondents in our collection are generally Foreign Nationals visiting the NDU to meet with NDU leadership. The collection instrument is a PDF document sent over email. Respondents access the PDF directly and return via email. Once the document is returned, the information is used to create a customized visit for the delegation and informs a read ahead document for NDU leadership. Information and electronic records are maintained in the NDU Enterprise Information System (NEIS), the NDU network. The NDU NEIS encompasses all hardware and software utilized to support the academic and business information hosted in university-owned systems.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 45.

Number of Respondents: 45.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 45.

Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency: On occasion.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: TRICARE Inpatient Satisfaction Survey (TRISS); OMB Control Number: 0720-TRSS.

Needs and Uses: The DHA administers the TRICARE TRISS survey to understand perceptions of inpatient care among Military Health System (MHS) users. The survey instrument adheres to the methodological and analytical protocols and questionnaire items mandated by the industry standard Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems protocol. Developed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the program provides valid and reliable self-reported experience ratings of inpatient experiences.

As a result, the TRISS program allows objective and meaningful comparisons between hospitals, in areas that are important to consumers. Results are published online, and the public can view them at https://www.medicare.gov/care-compare/. But perhaps most significantly, the comparative scores and findings can be used by MHS leadership to improve care as well as by beneficiaries to make informed choices. TRISS is designed to provide actionable performance feedback to improve overall quality of health care. The main goals of the TRISS are to:

• Provide comparable data on the patient's perspective on care that allows objective and meaningful comparisons between hospitals on domains that are important to beneficiaries.

• Establish a uniform measure of user satisfaction with received healthcare services.

• Public reporting of the survey results is designed to create incentives for Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) to improve their quality of care.

The study population consists of military personnel, their family members, and eligible retirees and their family members with a recent overnight hospitalization. The survey is administered to patients after a recent discharge from either a MTF or a civilian hospital to gather information about their experience of the care they received. Data are reported quarterly to track trends over time.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 12,720.

Number of Respondents: 63,600.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 63,600.

Average Burden per Response: 12 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Master's Degree Application Form for International Students; OMB Control Number: 0704-0599.

Needs and Uses: This form is used to collect the information required to admit international students to an NDU master's degree program. The respondents are prospective international students who wish to be admitted to an NDU master's degree program. They respond to this information collection in partial fulfillment of NDU application and admissions requirements. The completed collection instrument is processed by the NDU registrars and a committee of NDU faculty who review the application in consideration of admission to a master's degree program. The successful effect of this information collection is to satisfy NDU master's degree application requirements for international students so that an admissions decision can be made.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 30.

Number of Respondents: 120.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 120.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Frequency: Annually.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Naval Officers as Employees Survey; OMB Control Number: 0703-SDSU.

Needs and Uses: The proposed survey is sponsored by the Navy Chief of Information and originates out of the Navy's primary civilian public relations graduate education program at San Diego State University, where the Navy details public affairs officers annually in order to earn a master's degree. This study will explore the possible relationship between the Navy's digital communication subsidies, employee-organization relationships (EOR), and diversity, equity, inclusion, and belongingness (DEIB) in the officer ranks. Additionally, findings from this research may advance the Navy's understanding of how to use digital communication to improve DEIB and EOR in the officer corps. Only adults (those aged 18 years or older) are eligible to participate in the study. To get at this population, the researcher will study naval officers assigned to different types of units ( e.g., surface ships, aviation, submarines, special warfare, etc.) as they represent the key demographic desired for this study. Potential respondents will be recruited with the assistance of public affairs officers at type commands (TYCOMs) and fleets of these units. TYCOMs and fleets perform administrative, personnel, and operational training functions for a “type” of weapon system.

This study will employ a mixed-mode for collection of surveys, utilizing both an online survey hosted by Qualtrics and a paper-based survey method for when online completion of the survey is not ideal. Respondents will have an option to return the survey anonymously via mail. Data received from this survey will assist public relations researchers by gaining an understanding of EOR and DEIB in Naval officers from traditionally marginalized communities as well as advance employee-organization relationship theory.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 150.

Number of Respondents: 500.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 500.

Average Burden per Response: 18 minutes.

Frequency: Once.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) Credential Program; SECNAV Form 5580/1; OMB Control Number: 0703-0067.

Needs and Uses: DON and the U.S. Marine Corps are requesting Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval of the information collection to verify and validate eligibility of separated and retired DON law enforcement officers to ship, transport, possess or receive Government-issued or private firearms or ammunition. This will also verify and validate eligibility of separated, and retired DON law enforcement officers to receive DON endorsed law enforcement credentials, to include LEOSA credentials.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 450.

Number of Respondents: 900.

Responses per Respondent : 1.

Annual Responses: 900.

Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Challenges of Operational Environments Study; OMB Control Number: 0703-COPE.

Needs and Uses: The Challenges of Operational Environments Study is a longitudinal study that will assess stressors associated with different operational environments and their effect on mental and behavioral health. Because the operational environment of the Commands involved will change over time, the survey that is being submitted for approval has been designed to adapt similarly. The base survey will remain the same at every time point, while separate modules will be added according to a pre-determined phases ( i.e., maintenance period, sea trials, homeport shift, deployment, and post-deployment). Because the crew of the ships will change over time and participation is voluntary, some respondents may complete the survey at multiple time points, whereas others may complete it just once.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 4,167.

Number of Respondents: 5,000.

Responses per Respondent: 2.

Annual Responses: 10,000.

Average Burden per Response: 25 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Individual MCJROTC Instructor Evaluation Summary; NAVMC 10942; OMB Control Number: 0712-0004.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to provide a written record of the overall performance of duty of MCJROTC instructors who are responsible for implementing the MCJROTC curriculum. The individual MCJROTC Instructor Evaluation Summary is completed by principles to evaluate the effectiveness of individual MCJROTC instructors. The form is further used as a performance related counseling tool and as a record of service performance to document performance and growth of individual MCJROTC instructors. Evaluating the performance of instructors is essential in ensuring that they provide quality training.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 509.

Number of Respondents: 1,018.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 1,108.

Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Navy Personal Awards Form; OPNAV 1650/3; OMB Control Number: 0703-NPAF.

Needs and Uses: The purpose of DON military awards is to provide deserving members of the Naval Service recognition for qualifying acts of valor or non-combat heroism, for exceptionally meritorious achievement or service, and for arduous or otherwise special service. Nominations for Personal Military Decorations are submitted on the OPNAV 1650/3 for Service Members (active duty, retired, and veterans), Foreign Military, and Midshipmen. An award nomination package must include an Award Recommendation form, Summary of Action narrative justification, and a proposed citation. For all awards for heroism, combat or non-combat, notarized statements by at least two eyewitnesses must be included. Midshipmen in the Naval Reserve Officer Training (NROTC) are generally eligible for military awards only when serving under orders on active duty. As an exception to the general policy, when not on active duty NROTC midshipmen are eligible for Personal Military Decorations for acts of non-combat heroism on the same basis as inactive members of the Navy Reserve. If a decoration is approved, the referral Member of Congress (MoC) will be informed and the Navy or Marine Corps will make arrangements for an appropriate presentation ceremony. If the nomination, or request for upgrade, is disapproved, the MoC will be informed and provided the reason(s) for disapproval. The authority to complete this collection effort is given by SECNAVINST 1650.1J, DON Military Awards Policy; DoD Instruction 1348.33, DoD Military Decorations and Awards; and 10 U.S.C., Armed Forces.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 23.

Number of Respondents: 30.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 30.

Average Burden per Response: 45 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

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: Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2023-24 (ECLS-K:2024) Kindergarten and First-Grade National Data Collection and Transfer School Recruitment.

OMB Control Number: 1850-0750.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 157,586.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 83,612.

Abstract: The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS) program, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) of the U.S. Department of Education (ED), draws together information from multiple sources to provide rich, descriptive data on child development, early learning, and school progress. The ECLS program studies deliver national data on children's status at birth and at various points thereafter; children's transitions to nonparental care, early care and education programs, and school; and children's experiences and growth through the elementary grades. The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2023-24 (ECLS-K:2024) is the fourth cohort in the series of early childhood longitudinal studies. The study will advance research in child development and early learning by providing a detailed and comprehensive source of current information on children's early learning and development, transitions into kindergarten and beyond, and progress through school. The ECLS-K:2024 will provide data about the population of children who will be kindergartners in the 2023-24 school year. The ECLS-K:2024 will focus on children's early school experiences continuing through the fifth grade, and will include collection of data from children, parents, teachers, and school administrators.

The request to conduct the first three national data collection rounds for the ECLS-K:2024 was approved on April 7, 2023 (OMB# 1850-0750 v.26). The ECLS-K:2024 fall kindergarten data collection will be conducted from August until December 2023, followed by the spring (March-July 2024) kindergarten round, and the spring (March-July 2025) first-grade round. Each of these rounds of data collection will involve advance school contacts, for example to conduct student sampling activities, collect teacher and school information, and locate families whose children may have moved schools. Future OMB packages will be submitted for the third-and fifth-grade field test (to be conducted in March-July 2026), as well as for the national spring (March-July 2027) third-grade round and the spring (March-July 2029) fifth-grade round.

This current revision request (accompanied by 30 days of public comment) is to update study respondent materials, web and paper surveys, and website designs that will be used in the kindergarten and first-grade data collection activities. Many of the revisions in this package were made based on analyses of the fall 2022 field test data (OMB# 1850-0750 v.25), which informed changes to the design of the surveys and child assessment. Other changes occurred after further discussion on operational procedures. Revisions to the study instruments (and to some extent, the respondent materials and websites) are largely limited to changes to the spring kindergarten materials; an additional revision request will be submitted to OMB for revisions to the spring first-grade materials as additional discussions on design and operational procedures continue. National data collection work completed to date will also inform these future revisions.

The requested changes do not affect the approved total cost to the federal government for conducting this study, but they do result in a small reduction to respondent burden.

Assistance Listing Number: 90.400.

Funding Opportunity Number: EAC-23-002.

Funding Opportunity Title: Help America Vote College Program Service Day Mini-Grant Program.

1. Purpose of the Program. The Help America Vote College Program (HAVCP) was established in 2004, and through fiscal year 2009, distributed over $2.3 million to colleges and non-profits to recruit, train and support students serving as poll workers on Election Day. In 2023, the EAC introduced the HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant (Mini-Grant) Program. The information in this NOFO is specific to the Service Day Mini-Grant Program. The Mini-Grant Program is designed to stimulate community action on college campuses and increase the visibility of the EAC's National Poll Worker Recruitment Day and Help America Vote Day. In 2023, the EAC will make an additional $1 million available for the Help America Vote College Program with $50,000 to $150,000 set aside for the Service Day Mini-Grant Program.

The purpose of this grant program is to: (1) Encourage students enrolled at institutions of higher education (including community colleges) to assist State and local governments in the administration of elections by serving as nonpartisan poll workers or assistants; (2) Encourage college students to become cognizant of the elections process and civic education, and to assist in the administration of elections in their community; and (3) Encourage state and local governments to use the services of the students participating in the program.

College Student means any individual enrolled either on a part-time or full-time basis in any undergraduate, graduate, or professional college accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education in the United States.

2. Statutory and Regulatory Authority. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) anticipates the availability of $1 million dollars in discretionary grant funding, enacted in the 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub. L. No: 117-328), to support the Help America Vote College Program (HAVCP) authorized in the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), Public Law 107-252, Title V, Help America Vote College Program. Awards will be administered by the EAC.

3. Performance Measurement. HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program awardees will be required to report on the total number of college student participants served through the funded Service Day activities. The number of students served could include college student participants interacting with staff/volunteers tabling, attending a presentation or roundtable, or engaging through digital ( i.e., social media, website), print ( i.e., college newspaper), and/or audio platforms ( i.e., radio show, podcast).

Funding Instrument: Discretionary Mini-Grant.

Award Minimum: $3,000.

Award Maximum: $10,000.

Grant Period: 12 Months.

Anticipated Funding Available: $50,000-$150,000.

1. Funding Type. Funding will be provided in the form of a discretionary grant. EAC will authorize the Treasury Department to disburse funding identified in the agreement through the Payment Management System (PMS) to the applicant as an advance to be drawdown as expenses arise. Per 2 CFR 200, the timing and amount of advance payments must be as close as is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the non-Federal entity for direct program or project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs. The non-Federal entity must make timely payment to contractors in accordance with the contract provisions. Grantees will be able to request payments as often as practical for their program. Cash and in-kind match expenditures require the same documentation as Federal funds under 2 CFR 200. Grantees must request a drawdown of funds for incurred costs using the electronic Payment Management System (PMS). Prior to initial drawdown of funds, all Grantees must have secured online access to Payment Management System.

1. Eligible Applicants. EAC encourages applicants to forge robust partnerships to implement the grant and to sustain activities beyond the grant period of performance. The recommended partners for the HAVCP are institutions of higher education as defined in Section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001); Nonprofit Organizations; Community and Technical Colleges and Systems; Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs); Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs); State and Local Election Offices; and Other Minority Serving Institutions Program (MSIs) as designated by the Higher Education Act's Title III and V funding.

Priority Consideration. All selection criteria and application quality being equal, EAC will give priority consideration to projects from institutions and organizations that engage historically underrepresented groups, as defined by the Federal Government (See Appendix C), as poll workers. For the HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program, the EAC will provide further priority consideration to applicants who have historically not been recipients of EAC funding. The EAC is interested in using the Mini-Grant opportunity to engage new organizations in supporting and improving the administration of elections. The HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program will also provide priority consideration for organizations serving individuals or groups in an area of persistent poverty and/or historically disadvantaged community and for organizations serving individuals or groups in a rural area. The EAC is interested in using the Mini-Grant opportunity to engage organizations in locations where barriers to participation in the election process are frequently higher.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching. At the time of award, applicants must demonstrate either cash and/or in-kind contributions on-hand and/or commitments, or a combination thereof, to meet the required 10 percent match, based on the amount of Federal grant funds requested. Match must be met by the project end period.

EAC encourages applicants to leverage additional resources beyond the required match to supplement grant activities. Both matching and leveraged resources can come from a variety of sources, including, but not limited to the private sector ( e.g., businesses or industry associations); the philanthropic community ( e.g., foundations); and the non-profit sector ( e.g., community organizations or education and training institutions). Non-Federal, public-sector funds ( e.g., from States or local governments) may be used for matching funds, if necessary. Federal funds from other Federal agencies are not a permissible source of match, unless specifically authorized by the award pursuant to 2 CFR 200.306. Applicants may consult with EAC on sources of match to determine permissibility.

Grantees may recover indirect costs under this grant up to 10 percent of the total Federal share of the grant. If an applicant has an approved Federal indirect cost rate higher than 10 percent, the remainder of the indirect costs can be used as a matching contribution.

3. Other Requirements/Limitations. Applicants may not use any part of an award from the EAC to fund religious instruction, worship or proselytizing, voter registration, get out the vote (GOTV) drives, or other political activities that could be construed as lobbying. Project funds must be used for tasks and activities carried out without partisan bias and without promoting any political point of view regarding any election issue or candidates.

Applications that propose voter registration or GOTV efforts will be considered non-responsive and will not be eligible for funding under this announcement.

Any organization described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(4) that engages in lobbying activities is not eligible to apply.

The applicant nor its principals cannot be presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal department or agency. Federal regulations prohibit supplanting of funds, such as replacing routine and/or existing state or local expenditures with the use of Federal grant funds and/or using Federal grant funds for cost of activities that constitute general expenses required to carry out the overall responsibilities of state or local government.

1. Address to Request Application Package. The FY 2023 HAVCP Application Kit, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the program regulations are available at https://www.eac.gov/grants/help-america-vote-college-program.

Application information is also available at https://www.grants.gov/.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission. The deadline for receipt of applications will be Monday, December 18, 2023. Please submit an email stating your intent to apply to HAVCP@eac.gov. This Notice of Intent is not required but helps EAC better plan the review of applications.

The fully completed HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Application Form must be submitted, as a word document or pdf, by email to HAVCP@eac.gov with the header “HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program Application—[ORGANIZATION NAME]” before the application submission deadline. The electronic submission of your application must be made by an official representative of your institution who is authorized to request funding on behalf of the applicant organization.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM).

(a) At the time of application, each applicant must have an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) before submitting its application in accordance with 2 CFR part 25, Universal Identifier and System for Award Management. To register in SAM, entities will be required to obtain and create a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). Instructions for obtaining the UEI are available at https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration.

(b) Each applicant must maintain an active SAM registration, with current, accurate, and complete information, at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.

(c) Each applicant must ensure they complete the Financial Assistance General Representations and Certifications in SAM.

(d) Applicants must provide a valid UEI in its application, unless determined exempt under 2 CFR 25.110, Exceptions.

(e) The Agency will not make an award until the applicant has complied with all SAM requirements including providing the UEI. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time the Agency is ready to make an award, the Agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a Federal award to another applicant.

4. Submission Dates and Times. The deadline for receipt of applications will be Monday, December 18, 2023. Please submit an email stating your intent to apply to HAVCP@eac.gov. This Notice of Intent is not required but helps EAC better plan the review of applications.

The fully completed HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Application Form must be submitted by email to HAVCP@eac.gov with the header “HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program Application—[ORGANIZATION NAME]” before the application submission deadline. The electronic submission of your application must be made by an official representative of your institution who is authorized to request funding on behalf of the applicant organization.

Applications received after the deadline date and time are considered late applications and, absent extreme circumstances to be determined by the EAC, will not be reviewed. The EAC will notify each late applicant that the application will not be considered in the current competition. The EAC will only consider a request to submit an application after the deadline when the applicant can document that a technical issue with a government system prevented application submission prior to the application deadline. If an applicant misses a deadline due to unforeseen technical issues with a government system, the applicant may request a waiver to submit an application after the deadline to HAVCP@eac.gov. However, the waiver request will not be considered unless it includes a timestamp or other data point indicating the issue occurred prior to the application submission deadline.

5. Intergovernmental Review. Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” is not required for this program.

6. Funding Restrictions. Applications must be for eligible purposes described in this Notice.

7. Other Submission Requirements. Applications must be submitted by email to HAVCP@eac.gov with the header “HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program Application—[ORGANIZATION NAME]” by the deadline posted on Grants.gov. The electronic submission of your application must be made by an official representative of your institution who is authorized to request funding on behalf of the applicant organization. To request an accessible, hard copy of the application, please contact the EAC at HAVCP@eac.gov. EAC will not accept requests for a waiver of electronic submission requirements during the preview period. Such requests may only be submitted once the NOFO has been published on Grants.gov.

Interested applicants should submit an email to HAVCP@eac.gov stating your organization's intent to apply. This notice of intent is not required but helps us better plan the review of applications.

1. Criteria. All complete and eligible applications will be evaluated and scored based on the criteria outlined in this section.

The review and selection process are intended to produce a diversified set of high-quality programs that represent the priorities described in this Notice. The determinations made by the EAC may be different from what the applicant self-determined upon submission of its application. The stages of the review and selection process follow:

The EAC will conduct an initial Compliance and Eligibility Review to determine if an application meets the eligibility requirements published in this Notice and advances to the next stage of the review process.

An application is compliant if the applicant:

• is an eligible organization,

• submitted an application by the submission deadline, and

• requested Federal funds in the range provided by the Notice.

Reviewing for eligibility is intended to ensure that only applications eligible for award are further reviewed. However, determinations of eligibility can take place at any point during the application review and selection process. Applicants that are determined to be ineligible will not receive an award.

2. Review and Selection Process. The EAC will assess the applications based on the Organizational Characteristics, Program Design/Strategy, and Budget selection criteria using the scoring rubric below. The EAC will also consider the priorities and strategic considerations detailed in this Notice. All staff reviewing applications will be screened for conflicts of interest. Final funding decisions will be made by the Election Assistance Commission.

Total Points Available: 30.

Each application is scored by three staff members. Average scores and priority points are used to present recommendations to the Election Assistance Commission Executive Director and Commissioners.

Successful applications will address the following elements of Program Design and Strategy:

• A sound and relevant program that meets the unique needs of the communities served;

• A clear description of how the proposed activities will encourage college students to assist state and local governments in the administration of elections by serving as nonpartisan poll workers or assistants and encourage jurisdictions to utilize these efforts; and,

• The number of targeted college students, including how this number was calculated.

Successful applications will address the following elements of Budget and cost effectiveness:

• Costs are clearly justified based on the proposed activities and project scope;

• Budget and budget narrative are accurate and complete (See Appendix C); and,

• Cost sharing is clearly and accurately identified.

Priority Consideration. All selection criteria and application quality being equal, EAC will give priority consideration to projects from institutions and organizations that engage historically underrepresented groups, as defined by the Federal Government, as poll workers.

(a) The term “equity” means the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.

(b) The term “underserved communities” refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life, as exemplified by the list in the preceding definition of “equity.”

For the HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program, the EAC will provide further priority consideration to applicants who have historically not been recipients of EAC funding. The EAC is interested in using the Mini-Grant opportunity to engage new organizations in supporting and improving the administration of elections. The HAVCP Service Day Mini-Grant Program will also provide priority consideration for organizations serving populations in an area of persistent poverty and/or historically disadvantaged community and for organizations located in a rural area. The EAC is interested in using the Mini-Grant opportunity to engage organizations serving locations where barriers to participation in the election process are frequently higher.

3. Applicant Clarification. The EAC may ask applicants for clarifying information during the Clarification Stage of the review process. An Operational and Financial Management Survey will also be requested at this time. The EAC staff will use this information to make funding recommendations. A request for clarification does not guarantee an award. Applicants may be recommended for funding even if they are not asked for clarifying information. An applicant's failure to respond to a request for clarification adequately and in a timely manner may result in the removal of its application from consideration.

4. Pre-Award Risk Assessment. The EAC staff will assess the risks posed by applicants to determine an applicant's ability to manage Federal funds. This assessment is in addition to the Compliance and Eligibility Review and the Application Review. Results from this assessment will inform funding decisions. If the EAC determines that an award will be made to an applicant with assessed risks, special conditions that correspond to the degree of assessed risk may be applied to the award. Additionally, if the EAC concludes that the reasons for applicants having poor risk assessment are not likely to be mitigated, those applications may not be selected for funding.

Applicants will be notified in writing of the status of their application:

(a) Eligible and selected for funding;

(b) Eligible bur offered less than requested;

(c) Eligible but not selected for funding; or

(d) Ineligible for the award.

Applicants who are awarded funding will receive a Notice of Grant Award from the EAC with award terms and conditions as well as other grant documents. The Notice will inform grantees of the effective date for grant activities and disbursement.

1. Funding Type. Funding will be provided in the form of a discretionary grant. EAC will authorize the Treasury Department to disburse funding identified in the agreement through the Payment Management System (PMS) to the applicant as an advance to be drawdown as expenses arise. Per 2 CFR 200, the timing and amount of advance payments must be as close as is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the non-Federal entity for direct program or project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs. The non-Federal entity must make timely payment to contractors in accordance with the contract provisions. Grantees will be able to request payments as often as practical for their program. Cash and in-kind match expenditures require the same documentation as Federal funds under 2 CFR 200. Grantees must request a drawdown of funds for incurred costs using the electronic Payment Management System (PMS). Prior to initial drawdown of funds, all Grantees must have secured online access to Payment Management System.

2. EAC Terms and Conditions. All awards made under this Notice will be subject to the EAC's General Terms and Conditions and the Program-Specific Terms and Conditions for the program (where applicable). These Terms and Conditions contain detailed, mandatory compliance and reporting requirements. The full Terms and Conditions may be viewed on the EAC website here: https://www.eac.gov/grants/help-america-vote-college-program.

3. Reporting. Recipients are required to provide one final Federal financial report (FFR) and one final progress report (PR) submitted by email to HAVCP@eac.gov. Final reports are cumulative over the entire award period and consistent with close-out requirements. The final reports are due 120 days after the performance period ends. All reports must be accurate, complete, and submitted on time.

The Federal financial report required will be the modified version of the Standard Form 425 (SF-425) used by the EAC for other Federal awards. The progress report required will consist of a short narrative, listing of the actual number of college students served, and images demonstrating the Service Day activities undertaken with Federal and non-Federal matching funds.

Once the grant is awarded, recipients will be expected to have in place data collection and data management policies, processes, and practices that provide assurance that they are reporting high quality performance measure data. Failure to submit accurate, complete, and timely required reports may affect the recipient's ability to secure future EAC funding.

For general questions about this announcement, please contact the EAC Office of Grants Management at HAVCP@eac.gov or 202-734-0639. The program website also provides up to date contact information at https://www.eac.gov/grants/help-america-vote-college-program.

1. Paperwork Reduction Act. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the information collection requirements associated with the programs, as covered in this Notice, have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 3265-0025. Public burden reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 hours per response for individuals completing all parts of this form, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering, and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. You are not required to answer these questions unless this number is displayed. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 633 3rd Street NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20001.

2. Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. All applicants, in accordance with 2 CFR part 25, must be registered in SAM and have a UEI number as stated in Section D.3. of this Notice. All recipients of Federal financial assistance are required to report information about first-tier sub-awards and executive total compensation in accordance with 2 CFR part 170, Reporting subaward and executive compensation information.

3. Issuance of Federal Awards. The Election Assistance Commission is not obligated to make any Federal awards as a result of this announcement.

4. EAC Terms and Conditions. All awards made under this Notice will be subject to the EAC's General Terms and Conditions and the Program-Specific Terms and Conditions for the program (where applicable). These Terms and Conditions contain detailed, mandatory compliance and reporting requirements.

5. Effects of Nondisclosure. The information requested is voluntary; however, to be a recipient of this grant program, disclosure of personal or sensitive information is required to receive Federal benefits.

6. Use of Material. To ensure that materials generated with HAVA funding are available to the public and readily accessible to recipients and non-recipients, the EAC reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable right to obtain, use, modify, reproduce, publish, or disseminate publications and materials produced under the award, including data, and to authorize others to do so (2 CFR 200.315).

7. Uniform Guidance. All awards made under this Notice will be subject to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), in 2 CFR part 200.

8. Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. Grant recipients will be required to report at www.FSRS.gov on all subawards over $30,000 and may be required to report on executive compensation for recipients and subrecipients. Recipients must have the necessary systems in place to collect and report this information. See 2 CFR part 170 for more information and to determine how these requirements apply.

In accordance with 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2), DOE gives notification of the issuance of its Decision and Order as set forth below. The Decision and Order grants RSG a waiver from the applicable test procedure at 10 CFR part 431, subpart R, appendix C for the specified basic models for which RSG petitioned for waiver and provides that RSG must test and rate such equipment using the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order. RSG's representations concerning the energy efficiency of the specified basic models must be based on testing according to the provisions and restrictions in the alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order, and the representations must fairly disclose the test results. Distributors, retailers, and private labelers are held to the same requirements when making representations regarding the energy efficiency of this equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d))

Any manufacturer of a basic model employing a technology or characteristic for which a waiver was granted for another basic model and that results in the need for a waiver (as specified by DOE in a published decision and order in the Federal Register ) must petition and be granted a waiver for that basic model. (10 CFR 431.401(j)) Manufacturers may also submit a request for interim waiver pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 431.401.

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”), 1 authorizes the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C  2 of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve the energy efficiency for certain types of industrial equipment. This equipment includes walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers (collectively, “walk-ins”), the focus of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(G))

The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42 U.S.C. 6299).

The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s))

Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of covered equipment during a representative average use cycle and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) The test procedures for walk-in refrigeration systems are set forth at 10 CFR part 431, subpart R, appendix C, Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Net Capacity and AWEF of Walk-in Cooler and Walk-in Freezer Refrigeration Systems (“appendix C”) and appendix C1, Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Net Capacity and AWEF2 of Walk-In Cooler and Walk-In Freezer Refrigeration Systems (“appendix C1”). 3

Any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). DOE will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). In granting a waiver or interim waiver, DOE will not change the energy use or efficiency metric that the manufacturer must use to certify compliance with the applicable energy conservation standard and to make representations about the energy use or efficiency of the covered equipment. 10 CFR 431.401(a). DOE may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 431.401(f).

As soon as practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of such waiver. 10 CFR 431.401( l ). As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a final rule to that effect. Id. When DOE amends the test procedure to address the issues presented in a waiver, the waiver will automatically terminate on the date on which use of that test procedure is required to demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(3).

On February 17, 2022, DOE received from RSG a petition for waiver and interim waiver from the DOE test procedure for walk-in refrigeration systems set forth at 10 CFR part 431, subpart R, appendix C. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at pp. 1-3  4 ) Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(e)(i), DOE posted the petition on the DOE website. The petition did not identify any of the information contained therein as confidential business information.

DOE's currently applicable test procedure for walk-in refrigeration systems ( i.e., appendix C) incorporates by reference Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (“AHRI”) Standard 1250-2009, 2009 Standard for Performance Rating of Walk-In Coolers and Freezers (“AHRI 1250-2009”); AHRI Standard 420-2008, Performance Rating of Forced-Circulation Free-Delivery Unit Coolers for Refrigeration (“AHRI 420-2008”); and American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (“ASHRAE”) Standard 23.1-2010, Methods of Testing for Rating the Performance of Positive Displacement Refrigerant Compressors and Condensing Units that Operate at Subcritical Temperatures of the Refrigerant (“ASHRAE 23.1-2010”). AHRI 1250-2009 is the industry test standard for refrigeration systems for walk-in coolers and freezers, including unit coolers and dedicated condensing units sold separately, as well as matched pairs. The procedure describes the method for measuring the refrigeration capacity and the electrical energy consumption for walk-in refrigeration systems. Using the refrigeration capacity and electrical energy consumption, AHRI 1250-2009 provides a calculation methodology to compute AWEF, the applicable energy-performance metric for refrigeration systems.

In its petition for waiver and interim waiver, RSG presented several ways in which the currently prescribed test procedure would evaluate the specified basic models in a manner so unrepresentative of their true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. These issues are summarized below.

First, as presented in RSG's petition, the specified basic models of walk-in refrigeration systems are single-packaged dedicated systems that contain multiple refrigeration circuits that operate using a single power feed. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at p. 1) RSG claimed that the specified basic models meet the definition of a single-packaged dedicated system. Id. DOE defines a single-packaged dedicated system as “a single-package assembly that includes one or more compressors, a condenser, a means for forced circulation of refrigerated air, and elements by which heat is transferred from air to refrigerant, without any element external to the system imposing resistance to flow of the refrigerated air”. See 10 CFR 431.302. As described by RSG, each refrigeration circuit in the specified basic models is made up of a compressor, expansion, device, condenser, and evaporator. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at p. 1) The separate refrigeration circuits may share condenser fans, evaporator fans and a control system. Id. In its request for waiver and interim waiver, RSG stated that neither appendix C nor AHRI 1250-2009 provide a method for testing a single-packaged dedicated system with multiple refrigeration circuits. Id.

Second, RSG stated that the current test procedure requires that the unit under test be set up using a 25-foot line-set. Id. Section 3.3 of appendix C provides the test method for matched systems, single-packaged dedicated systems, and unit coolers tested alone, which references AHRI 1250-2009. Section C5 (Methods of Testing for Walk-In Cooler and Freezer Systems that Have Matched Unit Coolers and Condensing Units) of AHRI 1250-2009 references test setup requirements that include the addition of a line-set that includes either one or two mass flow meters. Under section C5 of AHRI 1250-2009, the gross refrigeration capacity must be determined either by the dual instrumentation refrigerant enthalpy method (section C5.1.1 of AHRI 1250-2009, Method 1) or by the calibrated box method (section C5.1.2 of AHRI 1250-2009, Method 2). Both methods require installation of a refrigerant mass flow meter in the system's liquid line to determine the cooling capacity. Section C8.3 and Figure C1 of AHRI 1250-2009 specify the setup and measurements to be conducted for Method 1, for which 25-feet of additional refrigerant line is added to connect the condenser to the evaporator (unit cooler). Within this 25-foot line, two mass flow meters are incorporated, and the heat balance calculated from the two flow measurements must be within ±5 percent. Section C9.2 and Figure C2 of AHRI 1250-2009 specify the setup and measurements for Method 2, in which 26-feet of additional refrigerant line is added to connect the condenser to the unit cooler (as for Method 1), incorporating one mass flow meter. Air-side gross refrigeration capacity and refrigerant-side gross refrigeration capacity are determined and must be equal to within ±5 percent for the test to be considered valid. The 25 feet and 26 feet  5 of additional liquid line and suction line piping used to set up the test is termed a “line-set”. In its petition for waiver and interim waiver, RSG stated that single-packaged dedicated systems are not intended to be remotely split via a line-set. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at p. 1)

In its request for waiver and interim waiver, RSG noted that DOE has issued test procedure waivers for single-packaged dedicated refrigeration systems using air enthalpy test methods. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at p. 2) DOE granted a waiver to Store It Cold for basic models of single-packaged dedicated systems on August 9, 2019. 84 FR 39286. Store It Cold petitioned for a waiver after determining that the dual instrumentation refrigerant enthalpy method specified in AHRI 1250-2009 was not providing consistent capacity measurements for its single-packaged dedicated systems. 84 FR 39286, 39287. The alternate test procedure associated with this prior waiver required that the specified single-packaged dedicated system basic models shall be tested using the Indoor Air Enthalpy Method and the Outdoor Air Enthalpy Method in accordance with ASHRAE 37-2009, Methods of Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat-Pump Equipment (“ASHRAE 37”). 84 FR 39286, 39292. DOE also granted waivers to Air Innovations, CellarPro, Vinotemp, and Vinotheque for walk-in refrigeration systems used in wine cellar applications, for which some of the basic models included in these waivers were single-packaged dedicated systems. 6 The alternate test methods included in these waivers require the specified basic models to be tested in accordance with AHRI Standard 1250-2020 ( 2020 Standard for Performance Rating of Walk-In Coolers and Freezers, “AHRI 1250-2020”), which references the air enthalpy methods in ASHRAE 37 for testing single-packaged dedicated systems. 7 Use of air enthalpy methods for testing a single-packaged dedicated system capture the impact of thermal loss and the infiltration of warm air into the evaporator portion of these systems, which increases the refrigerant load on the system. In its petition for waiver and interim waiver, RSG stated that its laboratory is not set up to conduct air enthalpy testing, and that it would require substantial time and expense to set up its laboratory to conduct air enthalpy testing. (RSG, No. 1, attachment 1, at p. 2) Additionally, RSG explained that it contacted third-party labs to inquire about testing single-packaged dedicated systems using the air enthalpy method, but these labs responded that they are not currently able to conduct air enthalpy testing. Id.

Third, in its request for waiver and interim waiver from the DOE test procedure, RSG stated that the current tolerance requirement of 0.5 °F for the on-coil temperature in section C3.3.3 of AHRI 1250-2009 is unrealistic. Id. RSG stated that indoor air temperature tolerances impact the on-coil temperatures, and that the test procedure currently prescribes a 1 °F indoor air temperature test condition tolerance. 8 Id. RSG therefore suggested that the on-coil temperature tolerance should also be 1 °F. Id. RSG noted further that it can be difficult to repeatedly achieve an on-coil temperature tolerance of 0.5 °F when units are shut down, re-plumbed, and recharged for testing. Id.

RSG also requested an interim waiver from the existing DOE test procedure, explaining that if DOE were to deny its application for waiver and interim waiver, it would experience economic hardship in the form of lost sales and/or a significant delay in the distribution into commerce of the specified basic models. Id.

On July 22, 2022, DOE published a notification announcing its receipt of the petition for waiver and interim waiver and granted RSG an interim waiver. 87 FR 43808 (“Interim Waiver Order”). In the Interim Waiver Order, DOE initially determined that the alternate test procedure—with certain minor modifications as discussed in the Interim Waiver Order—appears to allow for the accurate measurement of the energy efficiency of the specified basic models, while alleviating the testing problems cited by RSG in its attempts to implement the DOE test procedure for these basic models. Id. at 87 FR 43814. The alternate test procedure established in the Interim Waiver Order is based on the calibrated box method ( i.e., Method 2 of AHRI 1250-2009) with modifications to the refrigerant enthalpy test provisions of this method. Id. at 87 FR 43813. Using the calibrated box method, the measured capacity includes the thermal loss through the evaporator of the single-packaged dedicated system under test. Id. The calibrated box method serves as the primary test method. A modified version of the single-packaged refrigerant enthalpy method is specified in the alternate test procedure for use as a secondary test method. 9 Id. Under the modified refrigerant enthalpy method, the refrigerant liquid line length is reduced from 25 feet (as prescribed in AHRI 1250-2009) to a maximum of 5 feet, allows for the capacity measurements of multiple refrigerant circuits, and adds a calculation to estimate the single-packaged thermal loss of the unit under test. Id. The capacity as measured by the primary and secondary test methods must be within 6 percent of one another for a valid test. Id. at 87 FR 43814.

The alternate test procedure established in the Interim Waiver Order differed from the alternate test procedure proposed by RSG with regard to the condenser air entering wet-bulb temperature test condition. Id. RSG proposed that the condenser air entering wet-bulb temperature test condition be 68 °F for single-packaged dedicated systems that do not use evaporative dedicated condensing units, for which all or part of the equipment is located in the outdoor room. Id. Whereas, the alternate test procedure established in the Interim Waiver Order specifies the condensing air entering wet-bulb temperature as 65 °F, which maintains consistency with the requirements in Table 8 of AHRI 1250-2020. Id.

In the Interim Waiver Order, DOE solicited comments from interested parties on all aspects of the petition and the specified alternate test procedure. 87 FR 43808, 43809. DOE did not receive any comments in response to the Interim Waiver Order.

On May 4, 2023, DOE published a test procedure final rule (“May 2023 Final Rule”) that established a new test procedure for walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers at appendix C1, in addition to specifying minor amendments to appendix C. 88 FR 28780, 28810. Appendix C1 includes test provisions for multi-circuit single-package dedicated systems that are substantively the same as the methodology granted in the Interim Waiver Order. Use of appendix C1 is not required until the compliance date of any amended energy conservation standards based on the test procedure in appendix C1. Until such time, use of appendix C is required to demonstrate compliance with current standards. As discussed in the May 2023 Final Rule, the amendments to appendix C did not include provisions for multi-circuit single-package dedicated systems. 10 As such, for the basic models subject to the Interim Waiver Order, the need for the waiver from appendix C will continue until such time as use of appendix C1 is required.

For the reasons explained here and in the Interim Waiver Order, absent a waiver the basic models identified by RSG in its petition cannot be tested and rated for energy consumption on a basis representative of their true energy consumption characteristics. Therefore, DOE has determined that the current test procedure for walk-in cooler refrigeration systems would evaluate the subject basic models in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. DOE has reviewed the recommended procedure suggested by RSG and concludes that, with minor modification to the condenser air entering wet bulb temperature as discussed previously, it will allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of the equipment, while alleviating the testing problems associated with RSG's implementation of DOE's applicable walk-in test procedure for the specified basic models.

Thus, DOE is requiring that RSG test and rate specified walk-in basic models according to the alternate test procedure specified in this Decision and Order, which is identical to the alternate test procedure specified in the Interim Waiver Order. 11

This Decision and Order is applicable only to the basic models listed and does not extend to any other basic models. DOE evaluates and grants waivers for only those basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. RSG may request that DOE extend the scope of this waiver to include additional basic models that employ the same technology as those listed in this waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(g). RSG may also submit another petition for waiver from the test procedure for additional basic models that employ a different technology and meet the criteria for test procedure waivers. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1).

DOE notes that it may modify or rescind the waiver at any time upon DOE's determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 431.401(k)(1). Likewise, RSG may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if the company discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 431.401(k)(2).

After careful consideration of all the material that was submitted by RSG, in this matter, it is ordered that:

(1) RSG must test and rate the following Norlake- and Masterbilt-branded basic models with the test procedure set forth in paragraph (2).

(2) The alternate test procedure for the RSG basic models identified in paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for walk-in refrigeration systems prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431, subpart R, appendix C (“appendix C”) as amended by the May 2023 Final Rule, except that multiple-circuit single-packaged dedicated systems shall use: (1) either the calibrated box method or an indoor air enthalpy test as the primary test method, as detailed below; (2) the modified refrigerant enthalpy method as the secondary test method, as detailed below; (3) the net capacity from the primary and secondary test methods must agree within ± 6 percent, as detailed below; and (4) reported values for the overall system shall be the summation of the gross capacities obtained from the modified refrigerant enthalpy method conducted for each refrigeration circuit included in the unit under test, as detailed below. All other requirements of appendix C as amended by the May 2023 Final Rule and DOE's regulations remain applicable.

In appendix C:

Revise section 3.1.1 to read as follows:

3.1.1. In Table 1 of AHRI 1250-2009, Instrumentation Accuracy, refrigerant temperature measurements shall have a tolerance of ±0.5 °F for unit cooler in/out. Temperature measurements used to determine water vapor content of the air shall be accurate to within ±0.4 °F. All other temperature measurements shall be accurate to ±1.0 °F.

Revise section 3.1.4 to read as follows:

3.1.4. In Tables 2 through 14 of AHRI 1250-2009, the Test Condition Outdoor Wet Bulb Temperature requirement and its associated tolerance apply only to units with evaporative cooling and single-packaged dedicated systems.

Insert new section 3.1.8 as follows:

3.1.8 Tables 3, 4, 7 and 8 of AHRI 1250-2009 shall be modified to read as follows:

Remove section 3.2.5.

Add a new section 4, following section 3.5  Hot Gas Defrost Refrigeration Systems

When conducting testing in accordance with AHRI 1250-2009 (incorporated by reference; see 10 CFR 431.303), the following modifications must be made.

4.1.1 Replace section C3.1.2 of AHRI 1250-2009 with the following: Air wet-bulb and dry-bulb temperatures entering the Single-Packaged Dedicated System at its evaporator return and condenser air inlet shall be measured based on the airflow area at the point of measurement. One measuring station is required for each 2.0 ft 2 of the first 10.0 ft 2 of airflow area and one additional measuring station is required for each 4.0 ft 2 of airflow area above 10.0 ft 2 . A minimum of two stations shall be used and the number of measuring stations shall be rounded up to the next whole number.

4.1.2 Replace section C3.1.5 of AHRI 1250-2009 with the following: If sampling tubes are used, each tube opening may be considered a temperature measuring station provided the openings are uniformly spaced along the tube, the airflow rates entering each port are relatively uniform (±15%) and the arrangement of tubes complies with the location requirements of section C3.1.2 of AHRI 1250-2009. Additionally, a one-time temperature traverse shall be made over the measurement surface, prior to the tests to assess the temperature variation and ensure it complies with the allowable deviation specified in section C3.1.4 of AHRI 1250-2009. (Refer to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1 for more information and diagrams). If sampling tubes are not used for single-packaged dedicated systems that do not use evaporative dedicated condensing units, a single air wet-bulb or RH sensor may be used. When used, this sensor shall be located at the geometric center of the largest condenser coil face and 6-12 inches from the condenser coil.

4.1.3 Replace section 3.1.6 of AHRI 1250-2009 with the following: Refrigerant temperatures entering and leaving the evaporator section of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System shall be measured by a temperature measuring instrument placed in a thermometer well and inserted into the refrigerant stream. These wells shall be filled with non-solidifying, thermal conducting liquid or paste to ensure the temperature sensing instrument is exposed to a representative temperature. The entering temperature of the refrigerant shall be measured within six pipe diameters upstream of the expansion device. If the refrigerant tube outer diameter is less than 1/2 -inch, the refrigerant temperature may be measured using the average of two temperature measuring instruments with a minimum accuracy of ±0.5 °F placed on opposite sides of the refrigerant tube surface. In this case, the refrigerant tube shall be insulated with 1-inch-thick insulation from a point 6 inches upstream of the measurement location to a point 6 inches downstream of the measurement location. Also, the entering measurement location may be moved to a location 6 inches upstream of the expansion device.

4.2.1 Replace section C3.3.1 of AHRI 1250-2009 with the following: With the equipment operating at the desired test conditions, the temperature and pressure of the refrigerant leaving the unit cooler, entering the expansion device, and entering and leaving the compressor shall be measured. For cases where the calibrated box method or indoor air enthalpy method is also conducted, data used to calculate capacity according to the single-package refrigerant enthalpy method and the additional method shall be collected over the same intervals.

4.2.2 Replace section C3.3.3 of AHRI 1250-2009 with the following: For Single-Packaged Dedicated Systems tested using either the calibrated box method or the indoor air enthalpy method as the primary measurement and the single-package refrigerant enthalpy method as the secondary method, a preliminary test for Rating Condition A using the primary method is required prior to setting up the refrigerant enthalpy method measurements. In preparation for this preliminary test, temperature sensors shall be attached to the equipment's evaporator and condenser coils. The sensors shall be located at points that are not affected by vapor superheat or liquid subcooling. Placement near the midpoint of the coil, at a return bend, is recommended. The preliminary test shall be conducted with the requirement that the temperatures of the on-coil sensors be included with the regularly recorded data. After the preliminary test is completed, the refrigerant shall be removed from the equipment, and the refrigerant enthalpy measurement setup shall be completed. The equipment shall be evacuated and recharged with refrigerant. The test shall then be repeated. Once steady-state operation is achieved, refrigerant shall be added or removed until, as compared to the average values from the preliminary test, the following conditions are achieved: (1) each on-coil temperature sensor indicates a reading that is within ±1.0 °F, (2) the temperatures of the refrigerant entering and leaving the compressor are within ±4 °F, and (3) the refrigerant temperature entering the expansion device is within ±1 °F. Once these conditions have been achieved over an interval of at least ten minutes, refrigerant charging equipment shall be removed, and the remaining tests shall be conducted.

4.2.3 When conducting the refrigerant enthalpy method for a Single-Packaged Dedicated System, the length of the added liquid line conducting refrigerant out of the system, to the flow meter, and back into the system shall be no more than 5 feet. No such modification to the suction line shall be made.

Disregard section C5 of AHRI 1250-2009 and instead test according to the following method:

4.3.1 The Refrigeration Capacity for Single-Packaged Dedicated Systems shall be determined using either the Calibrated Box method or the Indoor Air Enthalpy method as a primary test method and the Single-Package Refrigerant Enthalpy method as the secondary test method.

4.3.1.1 Single-Package Refrigerant Enthalpy method shall determine gross refrigeration capacity by measuring the enthalpy change and the mass flow rate of the refrigerant using a single set of measurements.

4.3.1.2 Calibrated Box method shall determine net refrigeration capacity by measuring the heat input to the calibrated box, including thermal transfer through the calibrated box walls.

4.3.2 Indoor Air Enthalpy method shall determine net refrigeration capacity of Single-Packaged Dedicated System and input power in accordance with ASHRAE 37-2009, Figure C4 of AHRI 1250-2020, and the following modifications.

4.3.2.1 Net refrigeration capacity is determined by measuring airflow rate and the dry-bub temperature and water vapor content of the air that enters and leaves the coil.

4.3.2.2 Air enthalpies shall be determined in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 41.6. Entering air is to be sufficiently dry as to not produce frost on the evaporator coil. Therefore, only sensible capacity measured by dry bulb change shall be used to calculate capacity.

4.3.3 Testing Sequence. The primary test method shall be used to measure the capacity for Rating Condition A prior to set-up of the Single-Package Refrigerant Enthalpy Measurement. After set-up of the Refrigerant Enthalpy method, the Net Capacity shall be measured using both the primary test method and the Refrigerant Enthalpy method. The Net Capacity measurement using the Refrigerant Enthalpy method shall be within 6 percent of the net capacity measurement using the primary method.

If a capacity balance within tolerance is not initially achieved, take steps to reduce the thermal losses of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System evaporator compartment by sealing air gaps and potentially adding more external insulation. If using the Calibrated Box method as the primary method, achieving a capacity balance may require conducting the calibration with calibrated box insulation material at the same average temperature as during capacity measurement, or using multiple calibrations conducted at different average insulation material temperatures and using these data to construct a correlation for the calibration coefficient, K cb , as a function of average insulation temperature. The official performance measurements are based on the primary method testing without any air gap sealing and additional external insulation used to achieve the 6 percent energy balance in place.

4.3.4 The refrigerant enthalpy method Net Capacity shall be calculated from the Gross Capacity Measurement as follows.

The Net Capacity to be used in AWEF calculations shall be the net capacity measured using the primary method.

4.3.5 Upon the completion of the Rating Condition A steady state test, an off-cycle evaporator fan power test shall be conducted to measure the evaporator fan power consumption during a compressor-off period in accordance with section C10 of AHRI 1250-2009.

4.3.6 Upon the completion of the Rating Condition A steady state test for walk-in freezer systems, a mandatory defrost test shall be conducted to establish the energy input for a defrost cycle.

4.3.7 Upon the completion of the Rating Condition A steady state test, off-cycle evaporator fan power test, and defrost test (for walk-in freezer systems), the Rating Condition B and C steady state tests shall be conducted. Capacity balance as described in section C9.2 of AHRI 1250-2020 for Rating Condition A is not required for Rating Conditions B and C.

Disregard section C6 of AHRI 1250-2009 and instead test according to the following method:

4.4.1 For single-packaged dedicated systems, test chamber requirements shall be as follows:

a. For the calibrated box method, follow ASHRAE 16-2016 Section 6.1 for calibrated type calorimeters excluding water and water energy inputs for the indoor-side compartment.

b. For the indoor air enthalpy method, follow ASHRAE 37-2009.

4.5.1 General Description. In this method, capacity is determined from the refrigerant enthalpy change and flow rate. Enthalpy changes are determined from measurements of entering and leaving pressures and temperatures of the refrigerant, and the flow rate is determined by a suitable flow meter in the liquid line. This method shall not be used for tests in which the refrigerant liquid leaving the flow meter is subcooled less than 3 °F or for tests in which any instantaneous measurement of the superheat of the vapor leaving the evaporator coil is less than 5 °F. Supplementary cooling may be artificially provided for the liquid line to ensure enough subcooling when making measurements to establish the capacity balance for Rating Condition A, however, no official measurements used to calculate AWEF may be made while providing such supplementary cooling.

4.5.2 Measurements. Refer to Section 4.1 of this appendix and section C3 of AHRI 1250-2009 for requirements of air-side and refrigerant-side measurements.

4.5.3 Test Setup and Procedure. Refer to Section 4.4 of this appendix, section C7 of AHRI 1250-2009, and Figure C3 of this section for specific test setup. The length of the added liquid line shall be 5 feet, maximum.

4.5.4 Data to be Measured and Recorded. Refer to “Refrigerant Enthalpy Method” in Table C2 in section C7.2 of AHRI 1250-2009 for the required data that need to measured and recorded, except as follows.

4.5.4.1 Water vapor content of air entering the unit cooler (evaporator) and condensing unit may be measured using a wet bulb temperature measurement or a relative humidity sensor, but both are not required.

4.5.4.2 Wet bulb temperature of air leaving the unit cooler (evaporator) and condensing unit need not be measured.

4.5.4.3 Required refrigerant pressure measurement includes only subcooled liquid entering the expansion valve and superheated vapor exiting the unit cooler (evaporator).

4.5.4.4 Only one refrigerant mass flow measurement is required.

4.5.4.5 Measurement of Refrigerant oil flow rate and oil/refrigerant mass ratio are not required.

4.5.5 Refrigeration Capacity Calculation.

4.5.5.1 The refrigerant-side gross capacity is calculated by

4.5.5.2 Measurement of Capacity for a Single-Packaged Dedicated System with Multiple Refrigeration Circuits.

For a Single-Packaged Dedicated System with multiple refrigeration circuits, apply the refrigerant enthalpy method separately for each circuit and sum the separately-measured gross refrigeration capacities.

4.6.1 Measurements. Refer to section 4.1 of this section and section C3 of AHRI 1250-2009 for requirements of air-side and refrigerant-side measurements.

4.6.2 Apparatus setup for Calibrated Box Calibration and Test. Refer to section 4.4 of this section, section C7 of AHRI 1250-2009, and Figure C4 of this section for specific test setup.

4.6.2.1 The calibrated box shall be installed in a temperature-controlled enclosure in which the temperature can be maintained at a constant level. When using the calibrated box method for Single-Packaged Dedicated Systems, the enclosure air temperature shall be maintained such that the condenser air entering conditions are as specified for the test.

4.6.2.2 The temperature-controlled enclosure shall be of a size that will provide clearances of not less than 18 in at all sides, top and bottom, except that clearance of any one surface may be reduced to not less than 5.5 inches.

4.6.2.3 The heat leakage of the calibrated box shall be noted in the test report.

4.6.2.4 Refrigerant lines within the calibrated box shall be well insulated to avoid appreciable heat loss or gain.

4.6.2.5 Instruments for measuring the temperature around the outside of the calibrated box to represent the enclosure temperature T en shall be located at the center of each wall, ceiling, and floor.

Exception: in the case where a clearance around the outside of the calibrated box, as indicated above, is reduced to less than 18 inches, the number of temperature-measuring devices on the outside of that surface shall be increased to six, which shall be treated as a single temperature to be averaged with the temperature of each of the other five surfaces. There will be six rectangular sections of equal area, and each of these six sections will have a temperature-measuring instrument located at its center. If the refrigeration system is mounted at the location that would cover the center of the face on which it is mounted, up to four temperature measurements shall be used on that face to represent its temperature. Each sensor shall be aligned with the center of the face's nearest outer edge and centered on the distance between that edge and the single-packaged unit (this is illustrated in Figure C5 when using surface temperature sensors), and they shall be treated as a single temperature to be averaged with the temperature of each of the other five surfaces. However, any of these sensors shall be omitted if either (a) the distance between the outer edge and the single-packaged unit is less than one foot or (b) if the sensor location would be within two feet of any of the foot-square surfaces discussed below representing a warm discharge air impingement area. In this case, the remaining sensors shall be used to represent the average temperature for the surface.

One of the following two approaches shall be used for the box external temperature measurement. Box calibration and system capacity measurement shall both be done using the same one of these approaches.

4.6.2.5.1 Air temperature sensors. Each temperature sensor shall be at a distance of 6 inches from the calibrated box. If the clearance from a surface of the box (allowed for one surface only) is less than 12 inches, the temperature measuring instruments shall be located midway between the outer wall of the calibrated box and the adjacent surface.

4.6.2.5.2 Surface temperature sensors. Surface temperature sensors shall be mounted on the calibrated box surfaces to represent the enclosure temperature, T en .

Additional surface temperature sensors may be used to measure external hot spots during refrigeration system testing. If this is done, two temperature sensors shall be used to measure the average temperature of the calibrated box surface covered by the condensing section—they shall be centered on equal-area rectangles comprising the covered calibrated box surface whose common sides span the short dimension of this surface. Additional surface temperature sensors may be used to measure box surfaces on which warm condenser discharge air impinges. A pattern of square surfaces measuring one foot square shall be mapped out to represent the hot spot upon which the warm condenser air impinges. One temperature sensor shall be used to measure surface temperature at the center of each square (see Figure C5 of this section). A drawing showing this pattern and identifying the surface temperature sensors shall be provided in the test report. The average surface temperature of the overall calibrated box outer surface during testing shall be calculated as follows.

4.6.2.6 Heating means inside the calibrated box shall be shielded or installed in a manner to avoid radiation to the Single-Packaged Dedicated System, the temperature measuring instruments, and to the walls of the box. The heating means shall be constructed to avoid stratification of temperature, and suitable means shall be provided for distributing the temperature uniformly.

4.6.2.7 The average air dry-bulb temperature in the calibrated box during Single-Packaged Dedicated System tests and calibrated box heat leakage tests shall be the average of eight temperatures measured at the corners of the box at a distance of 2 inches to 4 inches from the walls. The instruments shall be shielded from any cold or warm surfaces except that they shall not be shielded from the adjacent walls of the box. The Single-Packaged Dedicated System under test shall be mounted such that the temperature instruments are not in the direct air stream from the discharge of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System.

4.6.3 Calibration of the Calibrated Box. Calibration of the Calibrated Box shall occur prior to installation of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System. This shall be done either (a) prior to cutting the opening needed to install the Single-Packaged Dedicated System, or (b) with an insulating panel with the same thickness and thermal resistance as the box wall installed in the opening intended for the Single-Packaged Dedicated System installation. Care shall be taken to avoid thermal shorts in the location of the opening either during calibration or during subsequent installation of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System. A calibration test shall be made for air movements comparable to those expected for Single-Packaged Dedicated System capacity measurement, i.e., with air volume flow rate within 10 percent of the air volume flow rate of the Single-Packaged Dedicated System evaporator.

4.6.3.1 The heat input shall be adjusted to maintain an average box temperature not less than 25.0 °F above the test enclosure temperature.

4.6.3.2 The average dry-bulb temperature inside the calibrated box shall not vary more than 1.0 °F over the course of the calibration test.

4.6.3.3 A calibration test shall be the average of eleven consecutive hourly readings when the box has reached a steady-state temperature condition.

4.6.3.4 The box temperature shall be the average of all readings after a steady-state temperature condition has been reached.

4.6.3.5 The calibrated box has reached a steady-state temperature condition when:

4.6.3.5.1 The average box temperature is not less than 25 °F above the test enclosure temperature.

4.6.3.5.2 Temperature variations do not exceed 5.0 °F between temperature-measuring stations.

4.6.3.5.3 Temperatures do not vary by more than 2 °F at any one temperature-measuring station.

4.6.4 Data to be Measured and Recorded. Refer to Table C2 in section C7.2 of AHRI 1250-2020 for the required data that need to measured and recorded.

4.6.5 Refrigeration Capacity Calculation.

4.6.5.1 The heat leakage coefficient of the calibrated box is calculated by

4.6.5.2 For each Dry Rating Condition, calculate the Net Capacity:

(3) Representations. RSG may not make representations about the efficiency of a basic model listed in paragraph (1) of this Order for compliance, marketing, or other purposes unless that basic model has been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth in this alternate test procedure and such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing.

(4) This Order shall remain in effect until the date upon which use of appendix C1 is required to demonstrate compliance with any amended energy conservation standards based on the test procedure in appendix C1.

(5) This Order is issued on the condition that the statements and representations provided by RSG are valid. If RSG makes any modifications to the controls or configurations of any basic model subject to this Order, such modifications will render the waiver invalid with respect to that basic model, and RSG will either be required to use the current Federal test method or submit a new application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may rescind or modify this waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis underlying the petition for the waiver is incorrect, upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of a basic model's true energy consumption characteristics, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 431.401(k)(1). Likewise, RSG may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if RSG discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 431.401(k)(2).

(6) Issuance of this Order does not release RSG from the applicable requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 429.

DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. RSG may submit a new or amended petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as appropriate, for additional basic models of single-packaged dedicated systems with multiple refrigeration circuits. Alternatively, if appropriate, RSG may request that DOE extend the scope of a waiver or an interim waiver to include additional basic models employing the same technology as the basic models set forth in the original petition consistent with 10 CFR 431.401(g).

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 17, 2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

DOE is publishing UCA's petition for waiver in its entirety, pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iv). DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by December 22, 2023, comments and information on all aspects of the petition, including the alternate test procedure. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any person submitting written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner is: John Hodges, jhodges@hwglaw.com, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20036.

Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.

However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. If this instruction is followed, persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.

Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (“CBI”)). Comments submitted through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section.

DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.

Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments.

Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. Faxes will not be accepted.

Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.

Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.

Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”), 1 authorizes the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) to regulate the energy efficiency of several consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA  2 established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency for certain types of industrial equipment. This equipment includes double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps, which are a subset of air-cooled commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D))

The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).

The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.

Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of covered equipment (or class thereof) during a representative average use cycle and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) The test procedure for air-cooled commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, including double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps, is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F, appendix A, Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Energy Consumption of Air-Cooled Small (≥65,000 Btu/h), Large, and Very Large Commercial Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment (“appendix A”).

Under 10 CFR 431.401, any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. DOE will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either that the basic model(s) for which the waiver was requested contains a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). A petitioner must include in its petition any alternate test procedures known to the petitioner to evaluate the performance of the equipment type in a manner representative of the energy consumption characteristics of the basic model. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). DOE may grant the waiver subject to conditions, which may include adherence to alternate test procedures specified by DOE. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2).

As soon as practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of such waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(l). As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a final rule to that effect. Id.

The waiver process also provides that DOE will grant an interim waiver from the test procedure requirements if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). Within one year of issuance of an interim waiver, DOE will either: (i) publish in the Federal Register a determination on the petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in the Federal Register a new or amended test procedure that addresses the issues presented in the waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(1).

If the interim waiver test procedure methodology is different than the decision and order test procedure methodology, certification reports to DOE required under 10 CFR 429.12 and any representations must be based on either of the two methodologies until 180-360 days after the publication date of the decision and order, as specified by DOE in the decision and order. Thereafter, certification reports and any representations must be based on the decision and order test procedure methodology, unless otherwise specified by DOE. Once a manufacturer uses the decision and order test procedure methodology in a certification report or any representation, all subsequent certification reports and any representations must be made using the decision and order test procedure methodology while the waiver is valid. 10 CFR 431.401(i)(1). When DOE amends the test procedure to address the issues presented in a waiver, the waiver or interim waiver will automatically terminate on the date on which use of that test procedure is required to demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(3).

On November 19, 2018, DOE received from UCA a petition for waiver and interim waiver from the test procedure for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps set forth at 10 CFR part 431 subpart F. 3 (UCA, No. 1 at pp. 1-9)  4 The petition did not identify any of the information contained therein as confidential business information.

In its petition, UCA stated that the current DOE test procedure does not address the unique characteristics of UCA's double-duct technology. (UCA, No. 1 at p. 1) UCA noted that the basic models for which it is seeking a waiver use a double-duct configuration, which do not have an outdoor section and instead have ducting to an outside wall or window for the supply and discharge of outside air to and from the indoor condenser. (UCA, No. 1 at p. 3) UCA asserts in its waiver petition that the energy characteristics of these double-duct air conditioners  5 are different from equipment with an outdoor section. ( Id. at p. 3) UCA additionally states that the Federal test procedure does not account for this technology, and that the standard AHRI 340/360-2007, 6 incorporated by reference at the time of petition, was developed to test products with both outdoor and indoor sections (and UCA noted the references to “indoor section” and “outdoor section” throughout that standard). UCA asserted that because double-duct units do not have an outdoor section, they cannot be tested by the DOE test procedure and a waiver is necessary. ( Id. at pp. 4-5) Further, UCA expressed that double-duct air conditioners have higher condenser fan motor horsepower to move condenser air against significant air pressure (0.5-1.5 in H 2 O) and smaller but deeper condenser coils, which creates a higher pressure drop than that of an outdoor condensing section, resulting in more energy consumption of the condenser fan motor, and claimed that both of these characteristics were not accounted for in the test procedure. ( Id. )

UCA also requested an interim waiver from the existing DOE test procedure, asserting that the petition for waiver is likely to be granted because the DOE test procedure does not address the unique characteristics of the requested basic models. ( Id. at p. 7) UCA stated that without the granting of an interim waiver, UCA would suffer economic hardship and be at a competitive disadvantage if it must wait to rate these basic models pending a determination on petition for waiver. ( Id. ) UCA also claimed that the petition was supported by sound public policy because the products offered property owners and developers the ability to install new efficient central air conditioning in old buildings. ( Id. )

EPCA requires that manufacturers use DOE test procedures when making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) Consistency is important when making representations about the energy efficiency of covered equipment, including when demonstrating compliance with applicable DOE energy conservation standards. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401, and after consideration of public comments on the petition, DOE may establish in a subsequent Decision and Order an alternate test procedure for the basic models addressed by the Interim Waiver Order.

UCA seeks to use an alternate test procedure to test and rate specific double-duct commercial unitary air conditioners (“CUAC”) basic models. As an alternate test procedure, UCA proposed to test the specified basic models by ducting the condenser fan and imposing external static pressure (“ESP”) per the manufacturer's instructions. Then, UCA proposed to adjust the input power of the condenser fan motor by subtracting “added” condenser motor horsepower imposed by the additional ESP, as presented below:

This formula is drawn from section 4.1.3.2 of ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO Standard 13256-1:1998  7 and is used in that test standard to adjust for the motor horsepower expended in moving air through the indoor ducts. UCA proposed that this formula be used to adjust the condenser motor horsepower for double-duct units tested at non-zero condenser ESP to account only for the motor horsepower utilized in overcoming internal resistance of the unit. ( Id. )

In the course of reviewing UCA's petition, DOE requested additional data from UCA to support their proposed alternate test procedure. UCA provided confidential data to DOE that included condenser fan power values at various ESPs and adjusted condenser fan power based on their suggested approach for several basic models offered.

DOE has reviewed UCA's application for an interim waiver, the alternate test procedure requested by UCA, publicly available specification sheets and installation manuals relevant to these basic models, and additional confidential data from UCA regarding its petition. In submitting a petition for waiver, a petitioner must demonstrate that the subject basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures or cause the prescribed test procedures to evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy and/or water consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1); 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). In determining whether to grant a request for an interim waiver, DOE considers whether: (1) it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted; and/or (2) it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(=3).

As described, UCA claims in its petition for a waiver that the subject basic models contain a design characteristic ( i.e., no outdoor section) that prevents testing according to the DOE test procedure. In response to this claim, DOE notes that the current DOE test procedure for double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps is the same as that for single-duct commercial air conditioning and heating equipment at appendix A. In a direct final rule published on January 15, 2016 (“January 2016 Direct Final Rule”), DOE clarified that double-duct air conditioners are tested and rated under the same test conditions as single-duct air conditioners, without any ducting connected to, or an external static pressure applied on, the condenser side. 81 FR 2420, 2445.

The DOE test procedure at appendix A references certain sections of both AHRI 340/360-2007 and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. 8 As mentioned by UCA, Table 3 of AHRI 340/360-2007 uses the term “outdoor section” in a header for columns providing test conditions. This term refers to the section of an air conditioning or heat pump system that rejects or absorbs heat (during mechanical cooling or heating mode, respectively), and does not apply only to units installed outdoors. For an air-cooled air conditioner, the test conditions under the heading “indoor section” are used for indoor air ( i.e., the evaporator airstream) and the test conditions under the heating “outdoor section” are used for outdoor air ( i.e., the condenser airstream), regardless of whether the components are intended for indoor or outdoor installation. DOE notes that condenser temperature conditions for testing water-cooled commercial unitary air conditioners (“WCUACs”) are also specified under the “outdoor section” header, but similar to double-duct systems, both the indoor and outdoor sections of WCUACs are generally intended for indoor installation. Similarly, DOE notes that in rooftop air-cooled and evaporatively-cooled commercial unitary air conditioners, the “indoor section” ( i.e., the section conditioning indoor air) is located outdoors. Further, DOE notes that both ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 (which is referenced in the current DOE test procedure at appendix A) and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2005  9 (which is referenced by AHRI 340/360-2007) use the term “outdoor side” to refer to the condensing section of an air-conditioning system. Specifically, both versions of ASHRAE Standard 37 define “outdoor side” as “that part of the system that rejects heat to or absorbs heat from a source external to the indoor airstream.” This definition does not specify or require that the outdoor side is located outdoors. Therefore, DOE has tentatively determined that UCA has not demonstrated that the basic models subject to the petition contain a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures because the test procedure applies to double-duct systems regardless of intended installation location.

DOE also evaluated UCA's petition to determine whether the prescribed test procedures evaluate the subject basic models in a manner so unrepresentative of their true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. Relevant to this evaluation, DOE notes that the current energy conservation standards for double-duct air conditioners are defined in terms of the energy efficiency ratio (“EER”) metric, which as defined by the test procedure at appendix A, represent the performance of an air conditioner when operating at zero condenser ESP. DOE further notes that the rating conditions associated with a metric are integral to the metric—performance measured at a different condenser ESP, for example, would not represent an EER value (as that metric is currently defined in appendix A) and would therefore not provide comparative data with which to compare to other equipment on the market subject to the same EER standard. As such, DOE evaluated UCA's suggested alternate test procedure to determine whether it would provide a more representative measure of EER ( i.e., a more representative measure of performance at zero condenser ESP) compared to the current Federal test procedure. 10 DOE reviewed UCA's proposed alternate test procedure, including the additional confidential data provided to DOE by UCA, within this framework.

UCA's suggested alternate test procedure specifies testing at a manufacturer-specified non-zero condenser ESP and then adjusting the measured condenser fan power down to reflect operation at zero condenser ESP. This adjustment of the measured condenser fan power requires an assumption regarding the efficiency value of the condenser fan. In its petition, UCA requested to use an assumed fan efficiency value of 0.3. Based on its review, DOE has tentatively concluded that the fan efficiency value of 0.3 suggested by UCA is unrepresentatively low. In particular, confidential data provided by UCA suggests that for some of the models subject to UCA's petition for waiver, assuming a fan efficiency value of 0.3 would result in the fan power adjustment exceeding the actual fan power consumed at zero condenser ESP, thus resulting in negative condenser fan power being reflected in the metric.

As a result, the test procedure suggested by UCA would under-represent the condenser fan power that would be expected at zero condenser ESP because it subtracts an unrepresentatively high adjustment factor from the measured value of condenser fan power. This would result in EER ratings of performance at zero condenser ESP that are unrepresentatively high and therefore not comparable to EER ratings developed by other manufacturers of double-duct systems based on testing at zero condenser ESP ( i.e., ratings developed without any adjustment to measured condenser fan power). Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that the alternate test procedure suggested in UCA's petition for waiver would not evaluate the performance of the subject models in a manner more representative of the energy consumption characteristics of each basic model, within the context of representing EER performance at zero condenser ESP.

Additionally, DOE notes that multiple other manufacturers of double-duct systems list condenser fan motor performance at ESPs as low as zero in their product literature, demonstrating that there is nothing inherent to double-duct systems that prevents representing EER performance at zero condenser ESP in accordance with the current Federal test procedure. 11 Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded that UCA has not demonstrated that the basic models subject to the petition contain a design characteristic that prevents testing of those models according to the prescribed test procedure or that the prescribed test procedure evaluates the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data with other double-duct systems. Absent such data, DOE is unable to conclude that UCA's petition for waiver will likely be granted.

Further, DOE does not find that public policy reasons weigh in favor of granting immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. As previously indicated, multiple other manufacturers certify to DOE EER ratings for double-duct systems that are compliant with the currently applicable EER standards and are based on the current Federal test procedure, which reflects performance at zero condenser ESP. These models demonstrate that commercial consumers currently have multiple options for installing double-duct systems; therefore, DOE does not find granting immediate relief to UCA is necessary. For these reasons, DOE is denying UCA's petition for interim waiver and requesting comment.

DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. UCA may submit a new or amended petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as appropriate, for additional basic models of double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps.

While DOE declines to approve the use of UCA's suggested alternate test procedure in an interim waiver at this time, DOE may consider including an alternate procedure in a subsequent Decision and Order. DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the petition, including any alternate test procedure.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 17, 2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

United CoolAir Corporation (UCA) respectfully submits this Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver  12 from DOE's test procedure for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. UCA seeks a waiver because the current DOE test procedure  13 does not address the unique characteristics of UCA's double-duct technology. Therefore, UCA's double-duct models cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure. UCA also requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application.

Since 1988, UCA has been a small, family-owned and operated American company. It is a specialty manufacturer of double-duct commercial air conditioners and other air conditioning products. It is located at 491 E Princess Street, York, PA 17403 (tel. 717-843-4311; https://unitedcoolair.com ). UCA's start came with the creation of air conditioning units built to meet extremely high standards for the U.S. Military. Since then, UCA has evolved into a full service provider of unique and often complex HVAC systems.

UCA specializes in double-duct commercial air conditioners. They are used to provide efficient central air conditioning in older buildings that are being renovated or updated and where there is only limited space available. These systems fit entirely inside a building and thus are dramatically different from the bulky products that have outdoor as well as indoor components. Their modular sections can be taken through standard doors or smaller openings, around corners, down hallways, and placed into service elevators. Indoor installation (above the ceiling and crawl spaces) minimizes expensive handling, rigging, or permits, and avoids the need for building modifications. It also eliminates expensive repairs and replacements due to weather damage, theft, and vandalism. All of these products are built-to-order and adapted to the different requirements of unique buildings, while providing the latest in control and design technologies.

The basic models for which a waiver is requested are set forth in the Appendix. They are double-duct commercial air conditioners distributed in commerce under the UCA brand name. The models are within the following series: C-Series; C13-Series; VertiCool Classic; and VertiCool Aurora. 14 The C-Series and C13-Series are indoor horizontal air conditioners. The VertiCool Classic and VertiCool Aurora series have vertical cabinets that fit neatly along walls, in closet spaces, or in mechanical rooms.

The UCA double-duct models are specialized, niche products intended for indoor installation—almost entirely in old buildings. They are ideal for replacement or renovation applications, where space constraints prohibit roof-top or other types of products. They do not have an outdoor section, and their energy characteristics are different from products that have one. They have ducting to an outside wall or window for the supply and discharge of outside air to and from the indoor condenser. 15 DOE's test procedure does not account for this technology and is therefore inapplicable for these products.

DOE has recognized the useful, unique nature of double-duct products such as UCA's.

DOE agrees that these [double-duct] units have features that justify establishing separate equipment classes for them. Double-duct units, as evidenced by several commenters, offer a unique utility that may otherwise become unavailable if these units were subjected to the more rigorous standards required by this direct final rule for other CUAC and CUHP equipment. DOE notes that double-duct units, which are installed within the building envelope and use ductwork to transfer outdoor air to and from the outdoor unit, would have added challenges in meeting more stringent energy conservation standards due to space constraints and added condenser fan power. 16

Even though DOE has agreed that double-duct products are unique and useful, its test procedure has not yet been amended to address and take into account their unique characteristics. Rather, the test procedure is silent on these products.

Instead, DOE's test procedure  17 incorporates AHRI Standard 340/360-2007, 18 which was developed to test units that have both outdoor and indoor sections. Specifically, AHRI 340/360- 2007 requires: “Standard Ratings shall be established at the Standard Rating Conditions specified in Table 3.”  19 Table 3, “Conditions for Standard Rating and Operating Tests,” mandates conditions for an “Indoor Section” and “Outdoor Section.”  20 “Table 3 indicates the tests and test conditions which are required to determine values of standard capacity and ratings and values of energy efficiency.”  21 Therefore, double-duct units, which do not have an outdoor section, simply cannot be tested by the DOE test procedure. Moreover, even though DOE acknowledges “added condenser fan power” as a distinguishing characteristic of double-duct products, 22 the DOE test procedure does not account for the higher condenser motor horsepower of these products. Nor does it account for the smaller but deeper coil required for the double-duct systems to move air through the duct and discharge it to the outside.

An outdoor condenser/condensing unit utilizes a propeller fan (light duty) to move large volumes of air against low air pressure (0″ External Static Pressure—ESP) and utilizes a relatively small motor. In addition, since space (footprint/volume/height) and air path (perimeter inlet and top discharge) through the outdoor coil of such models are not an issue, outdoor condensing sections typically utilize 1 or 2 row deep `U/L' shaped condenser coils to maximize heat transfer and minimize air pressure drop.

In contrast, a double-duct unit's condenser fan (heavy duty—typically centrifugal and belt driven) has to be designed to move condenser air against significant air pressure (0.5-1.5″ ESP), and it utilizes a relatively larger motor. Double-duct models also have smaller and deeper condenser coils than models with outdoor condensing sections, since cabinet space is much smaller than an outdoor condensing section. An indoor condenser coil is typically 3-4 rows deep, with higher pressure drop than an outdoor condensing section. Such higher pressure drop consumes more energy than that associated with an outdoor condensing section.

Since the DOE test procedure does not address and account for double-duct technology, a waiver is necessary. DOE's rules provide that DOE “will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements” in such circumstances. 23 Accordingly, UCA urges that a waiver be granted for the basic models in the Appendix that will allow use of the alternate test procedure discussed below. Unlike the current test procedure, the alternate test procedure is designed to properly take into account UCA double-duct technology. The waiver should continue until DOE adopts an applicable amended test procedure.

UCA proposes the following alternate test procedure to evaluate the performance of the basic models listed in the Appendix. It is the same as the existing DOE test procedure for commercial air conditioners, except that it takes double-duct technology into account. It does so by utilizing a formula drawn from Section 4.1.3.2 of ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO Standard 13256- 1:1998  24 to adjust for the motor horsepower expended in moving air through the indoor ducts. It bears noting that AHRI 340/360-2007 provides that ISO 13256-1:1998 is among those publications “essential to the formation and implementation of the standard [340/360]. All references in this appendix [to 340/360] are considered as part of the standard.”  25

The formula in Section 4.1.3.2 of ISO 13256-1 normalizes the double-duct condenser motor horsepower by adjusting the condenser motor horsepower to account only for the motor horsepower utilized in overcoming internal resistance of the unit.

The waiver should provide that UCA shall be required to test the performance of the basic models listed in the Appendix hereto according to the test procedure for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps in 10 CFR part 431, subpart F (including AHRI 340/360-2007), except as follows:

1. Duct the condenser fan, and impose ESP, each as per manufacturer's instructions.

2. Adjust kW input by subtracting “added” condenser motor horsepower utilizing the following formula. (No changes to unit cooling capacity or heating capacity is required.)

UCA also hereby applies for an interim waiver of the applicable test procedure requirements for the UCA basic models set forth in the Appendix. UCA meets the criteria for an interim waiver. UCA's Petition for Waiver is likely to be granted, because the current DOE test procedure  26 clearly does not address the unique characteristics of these UCA basic models. Without waiver relief, UCA would be subject to requirements that are inappropriate for these products. Additionally, UCA will suffer economic hardship and be at a competitive disadvantage if it must wait to rate these basic models pending a determination on the petition for waiver. DOE approval of UCA's interim waiver application is also supported by sound public policy. As noted above, these products offer property owners and developers the ability to install new efficient central air conditioning in old buildings.

UCA respectfully requests that DOE grant its Petition for Waiver of the applicable test procedure for specified basic models, and also grant its Application for Interim Waiver. UCA also requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application.

EPA received a petition from Sierra Club and the Environmental Integrity Project dated June 9, 2023, requesting that EPA object to the issuance of operating permit no. TV-0420-0015 v1.1, issued by SCDHEC to Century Aluminum of South Carolina, Inc. near Mt. Holly, in Berkeley County, South Carolina. On November 2, 2023, the EPA Administrator issued an order granting in part and denying in part the petition. The order itself explains the bases for EPA's decision. Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that a petitioner may request review of those portions of an order that deny issues in a petition. Any petition for review shall be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit no later than January 22, 2024.

This action provides information that is directed to the public in general.

This document lists the statements of findings made by EPA after review of submissions under TSCA section 5(a) that certain new chemical substances or significant new uses are not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This document presents statements of findings made by EPA during the reporting period.

TSCA section 5(a)(3) requires EPA to review a submission under TSCA section 5(a) and make one of several specific findings pertaining to whether the substance may present unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. Among those potential findings is that the chemical substance or significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment per TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C).

TSCA section 5(g) requires EPA to publish in the Federal Register a statement of its findings after its review of a submission under TSCA section 5(a) when EPA makes a finding that a new chemical substance or significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. Such statements apply to PMNs, MCANs, and SNUNs submitted to EPA under TSCA section 5.

Anyone who plans to manufacture (which includes import) a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose and any manufacturer or processor wishing to engage in a use of a chemical substance designated by EPA as a significant new use must submit a notice to EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture of the new chemical substance or before engaging in the significant new use.

The submitter of a notice to EPA for which EPA has made a finding of “not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment” may commence manufacture of the chemical substance or manufacture or processing for the significant new use notwithstanding any remaining portion of the applicable review period.

No.

In this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI)) on the PMNs, MCANs and SNUNs for which, during this period, EPA has made findings under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C) that the new chemical substances or significant new uses are not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment:

The following list provides the EPA case number assigned to the TSCA section 5(a) submission and the chemical identity (generic name if the specific name is claimed as CBI).

• P-22-0057, Polysaccharide, polymer with 2-propenoic acid, sodium salt (Generic Name).

To access EPA's decision document describing the basis of the “not likely to present an unreasonable risk” finding made by EPA under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C), look up the specific case number at https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/chemicals-determined-not-likely.

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

As required by the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (e)(11), this document sets forth notice of the proposed modification of a system of records maintained by the FCC. The FCC previously provided notice of the system of records FCC/OMD-25, Financial Operations Information System (FOIS), by publication in the Federal Register on October 6, 2016 (81 FR 69522). This notice serves to update and modify FCC/OMD-25 as a result of various necessary changes and updates. The substantive changes and modifications to the previously published version of the FCC/OMD-25 system of records include:

1. Updating the name of the system of records to Financial Operations Information Systems (FOIS), to reflect that this system of records covers multiple systems and applications;

2. Updating the language in the Security Classification to follow OMB guidance;

3. Updating the Purposes section for clarity and to reflect modernization of the CORES system to incorporate functionalities that were previously provided through separate systems and forms;

4. Modifying the language in the Categories of Individuals and Categories of Records to be consistent with the language and phrasing now used in FCC SORNs;

5. Deleting two routine uses (listed by former routine use number): (7) “Do Not Pay” System, which has been consolidated into modified Routine Use (6) Financial Obligations Under the Debt Collection Acts; and (4) Audits and Oversight, for which disclosures are covered under another exception to the Privacy Act;

6. Updating and/or revising language in the following routine uses (listed by the routine use number provided in this notice): (1) Public Access; (2) Drug Debarment List; (5) Financial Obligations Under the Debt Collection Acts and Do Not Pay; (6) Financial Obligations as Required by the National Finance Center (USDA), et al.; (7) Litigation and (8) Adjudication (formerly a single routine use); (9) Law Enforcement and Investigation; (10) Congressional Inquiries; (11) Government-wide Program Management and Oversight; (18) Statistical/Analytical Studies; (19) Breach Notification, the revision of which is as required by OMB Memorandum No. M-17-12; and (21) Non-Federal Personnel;

7. Adding one new routine use: (20) Assistance to Federal Agencies and Entities Related to Breaches, the addition of which is required by OMB Memorandum No. M-17-12; and

8. Updating the existing records retention and disposal schedule with a new records schedule: N1-173-00-001, Commission Registration System (CORES).

The system of records is also revised for clarity and updated to reflect various administrative changes related to the system managers and system addresses; policies and practices for storage and retrieval of the information; administrative, technical, and physical safeguards; and updated notification, records access, and contesting records procedures.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0120.

Title: Broadcast EEO Model Program Report, FCC Form 396-A.

Form Number: FCC-396-A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 5,000 respondents, 5,000 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in section 154(i) and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 5,000 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: The Broadcast Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Model Program Report, FCC Form 396-A, is filed in conjunction with applicants seeking authority to: construct a new broadcast station; to obtain assignment of construction permit or license; and/or seeking authority to acquire control of an entity holding a construction permit or license. This program report is designed to assist the applicant in establishing an effective EEO program for its stations.

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

OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.

Title: Enhanced A-CAM Cybersecurity and Supply Chain Risk Management Plan Requirements.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: New information collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities and State, local or Tribal governments.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 450 respondents; 900 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 10-50 hours.

Frequency of Response: One-time and on occasion reporting requirements.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 214, 218-220, 254, 303(r), and 403.

Total Annual Burden: 27,000 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: On July 24, 2023, the Commission released the Enhanced A-CAM Order (Order), 88 FR 55918, August 17, 2023, WC Docket No. 10-90 et al., FCC 23-60, which adopted a voluntary path for supporting the widespread deployment of 100/20 Mbps broadband service throughout the rural areas served by carriers currently receiving Alternative Connect America Cost Model (A-CAM) support and in areas served by rate-of-return carriers eligible to receive legacy support by the end of 2028. The Commission extended by 10 years beyond the remaining five years, for a total of 15 years, the term of support for electing carriers and set a methodology for determining support amounts for locations without 100/20 Mbps broadband service within a potential budget of no more than $1.27 billion annually, or no more than $1.33 billion annually if certain conditions are met, using an updated version of the A-CAM. By adopting this program, the Commission furthered its long-standing goals by promoting the universal availability of voice and broadband networks, while also taking measures to minimize the burden on the nation's ratepayers. The Commission also adopted requirements for the Enhanced A-CAM program to complement existing Federal, State, and local funding programs, so that broadband funding can be used efficiently to maximize the deployment of high-quality broadband service across the United States.

To ensure that the Enhanced A-CAM program does not deprive rural consumers in high-cost areas of broadband service that is as secure as the service deployed pursuant to other Federal funding initiatives, the Commission required Enhanced A-CAM carriers to implement operational cybersecurity and supply chain risk management plans by January 1, 2024—the start of the Enhanced A-CAM support term. Enhanced A-CAM carriers must submit such plans to the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) and certify they have done so, by January 2, 2024 or within 30 days of approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, whichever is later. Failure to submit the plans and make the certification shall result in 25% of monthly support being withheld until the carrier comes into compliance. If a carrier makes a substantive modification to its cybersecurity or supply chain risk management plan, the Commission requires that the carrier submit its updated plan to USAC within 30 days of making that modification.

The purpose of this information collection is to collect the operational cybersecurity and supply chain risk management plans required of the Enhanced A-CAM carriers by the start of the Enhanced A-CAM support term and address the burdens associated with that requirement.

Pursuant to the FDI Act, the Board designates that the DRR for the Deposit Insurance Fund shall remain at 2 percent for 2024. The Board is publishing this notice as required by section 7(b)(3)(A)(i) of the FDI Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(b)(3)(A)(i)). There is no need to amend 12 CFR 327.4(g), the section of the FDIC's regulations which sets forth the DRR, because the DRR for 2024 is the same as the current DRR.

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 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: Annual MLR and Rebate Calculation Report and MLR Rebate Notices; Use: Under section 2718 of the Affordable Care Act and implementing regulation at 45 CFR part 158, a health insurance issuer (issuer) offering group or individual health insurance coverage must submit a report to the Secretary concerning the amount the issuer spends each year on claims, quality improvement expenses, non-claims costs, Federal and State taxes and licensing and regulatory fees, the amount of earned premium, and beginning with the 2014 reporting year, the amounts related to the transitional reinsurance and risk adjustment programs established under sections 1341 and 1343, respectively, of the Affordable Care Act. An issuer must provide an annual rebate if the amount it spends on certain costs compared to its premium revenue (excluding Federal and States taxes and licensing and regulatory fees) does not meet a certain ratio, referred to as the medical loss ratio (MLR). Each issuer is required to submit annually MLR data, including information about any rebates it must provide, on a form prescribed by CMS, for each State in which the issuer conducts business. Each issuer is also required to provide a rebate notice to each policyholder that is owed a rebate and each subscriber of policyholders that are owed a rebate for any given MLR reporting year. Additionally, each issuer is required to maintain for a period of seven years all documents, records and other evidence that support the data included in each issuer's annual report to the Secretary.

Based upon CMS' experience in the MLR data collection and evaluation process, CMS is updating its annual burden hour estimates to reflect the actual numbers of submissions, rebates and rebate notices.

The 2022 MLR Reporting Form and Instructions reflect changes for the 2020 reporting year and beyond. For 2022, it is expected that issuers will submit fewer reports and on average, send fewer notices and rebate checks in the mail to policyholders and subscribers, which will reduce burden on issuers. Form Number: CMS-10418 (OMB control number: 0938-1164); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit and not-for-profit institutions; Number of Respondents: 480; Number of Responses: 1,677; Total Annual Hours: 170,091. For policy questions regarding this collection contact Jiyun Lim at 667-290-9650.

Section 505(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(j)) allows the submission of an ANDA to market a generic version of a previously approved drug product. To obtain approval, the ANDA applicant must show, among other things, that the generic drug product: (1) has the same active ingredient(s), dosage form, route of administration, strength, conditions of use, and (with certain exceptions) labeling as the listed drug, which is a version of the drug that was previously approved and (2) is bioequivalent to the listed drug. ANDA applicants do not have to repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain approval of a new drug application (NDA).

Section 505(j)(7) of the FD&C Act requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the “Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” which is known generally as the “Orange Book.” Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).

A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale, but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed drug (§ 314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that does not refer to a listed drug.

BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, is the subject of NDA 018401, held by Indivior, Inc., and initially approved on December 29, 1981. BUPRENEX is indicated for the management of pain severe enough to require an opioid analgesic and for which alternate treatments are inadequate.

BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, is currently listed in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. Odin Pharmaceuticals LLC submitted a citizen petition dated September 27, 2023 (Docket No. FDA-2023-P-4223), under 21 CFR 10.30, requesting that the Agency determine whether BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

After considering the citizen petition and reviewing Agency records and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined under § 314.161 that BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, was not withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. The petitioner has identified no data or other information suggesting that this drug product was withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully reviewed our files for records concerning the withdrawal of BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, from sale. We have also independently evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing adverse events. We have found no information that would indicate that this drug product was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. The “Discontinued Drug Product List” delineates, among other items, drug products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other than safety or effectiveness. FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of approved ANDAs that refer to this drug product. Additional ANDAs for this drug product may also be approved by the Agency as long as they meet all other legal and regulatory requirements for the approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines that labeling for this drug product should be revised to meet current standards, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Translation of GLP Study Reports: Questions and Answers.” Nonclinical laboratory studies conducted in compliance with GLP regulations (21 CFR part 58) are being conducted by testing facilities located in foreign countries. In instances where the GLP study report is generated in a non-English language, the study report is often translated into English for submission to FDA. When translating a study report into English from a study conducted in compliance with GLP regulations, the translation should be clear, accurate, complete, and follow written processes and procedures. The sponsor should ensure that the translated report is an accurate representation of the original GLP study report.

This 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 “Translation of GLP Study Reports: Questions and Answers.” 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 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 58 for good laboratory practice for nonclinical laboratory studies have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0119.

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

In the United States in 2021, 1 in every 10 infants was born prematurely (before 37 weeks of pregnancy). Infants born too early have higher rates of death and disability, resulting in a significant public health concern. The exact mechanisms and risk factors associated with spontaneous preterm birth are not fully understood, resulting in a dearth of interventions demonstrated to be effective and safe.

FDA endorses an informed and balanced approach to gathering data supporting the safe and effective use of drugs and biological products for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth. Currently, there is a significant medical need for such therapies, as there are no FDA approved therapies for reducing the risk of neonatal morbidity/mortality resulting from spontaneous preterm birth. Input from this meeting will help provide guidance on the development of therapies for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth.

The meeting will allow participants (including clinicians, patients, family, researchers, ethicists, professional societies, and other stakeholders) to provide input on key topics, including:

For more information on the meeting topics and discussion questions, visit https://duke.is/g/gde6. Duke-Margolis will publish a discussion guide outlining background information and current thinking on the topic areas to this website approximately 2 weeks before the meeting date. FDA will also post the agenda and other meeting materials to this website approximately 5 business days before the meeting.

The format of the public meeting will consist of a series of presentations, panel discussions, and open discussion.

Registration: To register for the virtual public meeting, please visit the following website: https://duke.is/g/gde6. Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, and telephone.

Registration is free. Persons interested in attending this virtual public meeting must register. Early registration is recommended. Registrants will receive confirmation once they have been accepted. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Luke Durocher, Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, at margolisevents@duke.edu or at 202-621-2800.

Streaming Webcast of the Public Meeting: This virtual public meeting will be webcast via Zoom and the archived video footage will be available at the event website. The link for registration is the same as above: https://duke.is/g/gde6. Registered webcast participants will be sent technical system requirements in advance of the event. It is recommended that you review these technical system requirements prior to joining the streaming webcast of the public meeting. Although FDA has verified the website addresses in this document, please note that websites are subject to change over time.

Transcripts: Please be advised that transcripts of the public meeting will not be available.

This public workshop is intended to meet a performance goal FDA agreed to under the FDA User Fee Reauthorization Act of 2022, in accordance with the PDUFA Reauthorization Performance Goals and Procedures Fiscal Years 2023 Through 2027 letter (PDUFA VII letter), which is available at https://www.fda.gov/media/151712/download. Specifically, section I.4.e of the PDUFA VII letter outlines goals to enhance FDA's capacity to review complex innovative designs and convene a public workshop to discuss aspects of complex adaptive, Bayesian, and other novel clinical trial designs.

The purpose of this public workshop is to facilitate discussion on the use of external data sources, Bayesian statistical methods, and simulations in complex innovative trial designs as well as trial implementation ( e.g., examples of defining and mitigating bias when using select trial design methods). Discussion topics will include considerations for external data sources, Bayesian statistical methods, simulations, and clinical trial implementation and will be based on FDA accumulated experience both within and outside of the Complex Innovative Trial Design Meeting Program ( https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-resources/complex-innovative-trial-design-meeting-program ).

The workshop will consist of two sessions. The first session will focus on case studies that will illustrate various aspects of complex innovative designs and implementation. The second session will consist of panel discussions motivated by the case studies. There will be an opportunity for public comment.

Workshop updates, agenda, and background materials (if any) will be made available at https://www.fda.gov/news-events/advancing-use-complex-innovative-designs-clinical-trials-pilot-practice-03052024 prior to the workshop.

Registration: To register for the public workshop, please visit https://ComplexInnovativeDesignsWorkshop.eventbrite.com by February 27, 2024, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Registration will be available starting January 16, 2024. Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, affiliation, and email. If you are unable to attend the workshop in person, you can register to view a live webcast of the workshop. You will be asked to indicate in your registration if you plan to attend in person or via the webcast.

Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority given to early registrants. Persons interested in attending this public workshop must register by February 27, 2024, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Early registration is recommended because onsite seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of in-person participants from each organization. Registrants will receive a confirmation email after they register.

If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Tuan Pham (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ) at least 14 days before the workshop.

Streaming Webcast of the Public Workshop: This public workshop will also be available on webcast. To register for the webcast of this public workshop, visit https://ComplexInnovativeDesignsWorkshop.eventbrite.com by February 27, 2024, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, affiliation, and email. A link to the webcast will be provided following registration. Although FDA verified the website addresses in this document, please note that websites are subject to change over time.

Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the public workshop is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A link to the transcript will also be available on the internet at https://www.fda.gov/news-events/advancing-use-complex-innovative-designs-clinical-trials-pilot-practice-03052024.

The HSAPC provides organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific, and actionable recommendations to the Secretary on key issues at the intersection of education, academia, and the DHS mission.

The Secretary has requested that the HSAPC form new subcommittees to study and provide recommendations in three critical areas for the Department:

1. Supporting K-12 school and higher education communities in fostering safety and inclusivity in schools and on campuses and supporting campus law enforcement professionals and others charged with keeping academic communities safe.

2. Combatting online child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA), including development of guidelines and best practices for educators and academic institutions to understand and reduce the risk of CSEA; establish processes and protocols to detect and report online CSEA and; partner with law enforcement and support communities to support investigations and victims. Additionally, the review and recommendation should include an assessment of DHS educational, awareness, and school safety resources to prevent, detect, and report CSEA. This should include best practices for content delivery, how it is delivered, who is delivering, and audience prioritization.

3. Foreign malign influence in higher education, including guidelines and best practices for higher education institutions to reduce the risk of and counter foreign malign influence; consideration of a public-private partnership to enhance collaboration and information sharing on foreign malign influence; and an assessment of how the U.S. Government can enhance its internal operations and posture to effectively coordinate and address foreign malign influence-related national security risks posed to higher education institutions.

Schedule: The subcommittees' findings and recommendations will be submitted to the HSAPC for its deliberation and vote during a public meeting on December 13, 2023 and a public meeting in Spring 2024.

The FBSAC provides organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific, and actionable advice to the Secretary through the OPE Assistant Secretary, who serves as the DHS Faith-Based Organizations Security Coordinator on security and preparedness matters related to places of worship, faith communities, and faith-based organizations. The Council consists of members who are: faith-based organization security officials; faith-based organization leaders; faith leaders; State and local public safety, law enforcement, and emergency management leaders; and a representative from the Department of Justice or Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The Secretary has requested that the FBSAC form a new subcommittee to study and provide recommendations in the following critical area for the Department:

1. Combatting online child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA), providing recommendations on how DHS can partner with faith-based organizations to inform faith-based leaders and communities about how to recognize and respond appropriately to incidents of online CSEA; and an assessment to gauge the strengths, gaps, and opportunities in faith-based community awareness, engagement, and whole-of-community involvement. This assessment should include recommendations for faith-based organization collaboration to raise public awareness of online CSEA.

Schedule: The subcommittees findings and recommendations will be submitted to the FBSAC for its deliberation and vote during a public meeting within 150 days of November 14, 2023.

The Homeland Security Advisory Council provides organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific, and actionable advice and recommendations for the consideration of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security on matters related to homeland security. The Homeland Security Advisory Council is comprised of leaders in local law enforcement, first responders, public health, State, local and tribal government, national policy, the private sector, and academia.

The Secretary has requested that the HSAC form a new subcommittee to provide recommendations to the Department to combat online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Specifically, the tasking requested the following:

1. An assessment of how DHS can streamline and strengthen internal operations across components to effectively coordinate and collectively address online child sexual exploitation and abuse alongside our international partners, the technology industry, and non-governmental organizations.

2. An assessment and development of recommended actions for the technology industry to proactively identify, report, and prevent future sexual exploitation and abuse of children online. The assessment should include:

a. A review of existing authorities and how DHS could utilize these authorities to move our interests forward; and

b. Identification of the barriers impeding industry from providing actionable information to law enforcement to identify victims and perpetrators.

3. An assessment to gauge the strengths, gaps, and opportunities in public awareness, industry engagement, and whole-of-community involvement. This assessment should include recommendations for cross-industry collaboration to raise public awareness of online Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA).

A full report of findings and recommendations is due to be submitted from the HSAC by April 2024.

Correction

In the Federal Register of October 5, 2023, in FR Doc 2023-22183, on page 69219, in the first column, the following corrections are made:

1. On page 69219, in the first column, in the Dates caption, revise the “Dates” section to read as follows:

2. On page 69219, in the first column, after the dates section, add a section to read as follows:

1. Electronic Submission of Comments. Comments may be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically through the website can be viewed by other commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should follow instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.

2. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at all Federal agencies, however, submission of comments by mail often results in delayed delivery. To ensure timely receipt, HUD recommends that comments be mailed at least two weeks in advance of the public comment deadline.

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 21, 2023 at 88 FR 47158.

Title of Information Collection: Evaluation of the Moving to Work (MTW) Expansion Asset Building Cohort.

OMB Approval Number: 2528-New.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: N/A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The purpose of this proposed information collection is to evaluate the Moving to Work Expansion Asset Building Cohort (hereinafter “Asset Building Cohort”). This 60-day Notice informs the public of intent to collect data about the asset building programs implemented by the PHAs in the Asset Building Cohort and about the HUD-assisted residents selected to participate in the asset building programs. HUD selected 18 Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) to participate in the Asset Building Cohort, and 17 of these PHAs joined the MTW demonstration. Each PHA will implement an opt-out savings program, a rent reporting for credit building program, or a custom asset building program. The savings account and rent reporting programs are described in PIH Notice 2022-11. For the savings account program, PHAs will contribute at least $10 per month for 24 months to at least 25 residents to support buildup of emergency savings. For the rent reporting program, PHAs will report on-time rent payments made by participating public housing residents to credit agencies so that the residents' credit reports will gain a tradeline (rental tradeline). The added rental tradeline may increase residents' credit visibility and credit scores. HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) will evaluate the impacts of these asset building programs. The evaluation requires data from several sources, including the new information collection described in this Notice.

The first phase of the evaluation of the Asset Building Cohort is guided by a few overarching questions: (1) What programs are PHAs implementing? What are the characteristics of the group of residents participating in the programs? (2) How do participants understand the programs? And what do the programs mean for them personally? The programs will run for two years. The first phase of the evaluation will collect data from the following samples:

(1) PHA staff (n = 51), staff of partner organizations (n = 12), and PHA residents (n= 10)

(2) Residents that volunteered for the rent reporting for credit building pilot program, including households that were randomly assigned to have their rent payments reported to credit agencies and households that were assigned to a control group (who don't have their rent payments reported to credit agencies) (n = 300)

(3) Residents that volunteered for the rent reporting for credit building pilot program and agree to participate in in-depth qualitative interviews at up to four time points during the two years that the PHA is required to offer the program (n = 40)

The evaluator will conduct interviews of about 1 hour with staff from participating PHAs, organizational partners ( e.g., a bank that partners with a PHA to set up savings accounts for unbanked residents), and PHA residents to better understand facilitators and challenges to starting and running the asset building programs. The evaluator will interview up to 3 staff per PHA at all 17 PHAs, up to 3 partners at 4 PHAs selected for in-depth case studies, and up to 5 residents at 2 of the case study PHAs.

Residents participating in the rent reporting programs must complete an Informed Consent Form (ICF) and Baseline Information Form (BIF). The BIF will provide important information not otherwise available from HUD's administrative data, such as whether the household has significant barriers to employment. The BIF will take on average 15 minutes to complete. After enrollment in the program, 40 participants, including 20 members of the treatment group and 20 members of the control group, will be asked to participate in qualitative interviews of about 90 minutes each at two different time points during the first year of the rent reporting programs. The qualitative interviews will focus on experiences with the rent reporting program, household budgeting, and the broader context of interactions with banking, credit, and financial institutions. The Federal Register Notice provides an opportunity to comment on the data collection instruments and associated materials to be administered to the respondents at PHAs (including staff and residents) in the Asset Building Cohort and at partner organizations.

Respondents: Adults who work at, provide services at, or are assisted by PHAs participating in the Asset Building Cohort.

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.

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.

Following the preparation of a Final EIS, the Caldwell Canyon Mine and Reclamation project was approved in a 2019 Record of Decision (ROD). Since that approval in 2019 and continuing through May 2023, P4 Production developed and constructed various components of the original project including a service road, haul roads, various utility lines, loadout facilities, and earthwork to prepare for ore removal.

In June 2023, as a result of legal action challenging the BLM's decision and analysis, the Final EIS and ROD were vacated by the United States District Court for the District of Idaho (Case No. 4:21-cv-00182-BLM). As a result of this vacatur, P4 Production submitted a new RMRP, which the BLM will analyze under NEPA. The RMRP proposes modifying existing lease boundaries, developing two new open mine pits, constructing haul and access roads, installing various utility lines, and constructing water management features, monitoring wells, and shop and office facilities (the Project).

The purpose of the Project is for the BLM to evaluate and respond to the RMRP submitted for the recovery of phosphate ore and to modify leases, in accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. P4 Production has certain rights and privileges to recover phosphate from their leases, including the exploration, mining, and disposal of the phosphate or phosphate rock, subject to applicable requirements. The need for the Project is to develop the phosphate resources, using an economically viable method, in accordance with federal laws and regulations governing federal mineral leases, consistent with applicable law.

P4 Production's RMRP proposes to mine phosphate ore in Caribou County, Idaho, from three existing federal phosphate leases by constructing two open pits, constructing haul and access roads, installing various utility lines, and constructing water management features, monitoring wells, and shop and office facilities, while implementing environmental protection measures and reclamation.

The Project would create two open pits, portions of which extend beyond the existing federal lease boundaries. To accommodate those portions of the pits that extend outside the current federal leases, P4 Production proposes to expand their leases in accordance with 43 CFR subpart 3510.

The mining and the support facilities would encompass approximately 1,830 acres. The expected mine life would be approximately 40 years. Reclamation would be concurrent with mining and is scheduled to conclude two years after mining ceases.

In addition to the No Action Alternative (not approving the RMRP and lease modifications) and the Proposed Action, other possible alternatives may include a new proposed haul and access road and utility corridor that avoid federal surface as much as possible, and alternatives that address the sage-grouse issues identified by the Court. The BLM welcomes comments on all preliminary alternatives, as well as suggestions for additional alternatives.

The BLM expects mining and hauling operations to: change groundwater and surface water quantity and quality within regulatory limits; remove and change the structure and composition of vegetation, including species important to Native American Tribes; disturb wetlands and riparian habitat; modify wildlife habitat, including sage-grouse habitat; change scenery; disturb soil; permanently remove mineral resources; create air and fugitive dust emissions; extend economic activity such as employment and the continued operation of an existing elemental phosphorous processing plant; support businesses and generate tax revenue; and reduce livestock grazing.

The BLM anticipates that the following permits and approvals may be required for the Project:

The BLM will provide additional opportunities for public participation consistent with the NEPA process, including a 45-day comment period on the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS is anticipated to be available for public review in summer 2024 and the Final EIS is anticipated to be released in December 2024, with a Record of Decision no sooner than 30 days after the release of the Final EIS.

This notice of intent initiates the scoping period. The BLM will be holding a virtual public scoping meeting. The specific date and time of the virtual meeting, including information on how to register, will be announced in advance via press release, newspaper notice, the ePlanning project page, and email.

The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Idaho Department of Lands, and Idaho Governor's Office of Energy and Minerals are Cooperating Agencies.

Idaho Falls District Manager Mary D'Aversa is the BLM responsible official.

The BLM Idaho Falls District Manager will decide whether and under what conditions to approve land use authorizations on BLM-managed public land and the RMRP on leased lands, and to recommend the approval or disapproval of proposed lease modifications to the BLM Idaho State Office Branch Chief for Minerals, Land Tenure, and Water Rights. The decision and recommendation will be documented in a ROD.

The BLM will identify, analyze, and consider mitigation to address the reasonably foreseeable impacts to resources from the Proposed Action and all analyzed reasonable alternatives and, in accordance with 40 CFR 1502.14(e), include appropriate mitigation measures not already included in the Proposed Action or Action Alternative(s). Mitigation may include avoidance, minimization, rectification, reduction or elimination over time, and compensation, and it may be considered at multiple scales, including the landscape scale.

The BLM will utilize and coordinate the NEPA process to help support compliance with applicable procedural requirements under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1536) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 306108) as provided in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3), including public involvement requirements of Section 106. Information about historic and cultural resources and threatened and endangered species within the area potentially affected by the Project will assist the BLM in identifying and evaluating impacts to such resources.

The BLM will consult with Indian Tribal Nations on a government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order 13175, BLM MS 1780, and other Departmental policies. The BLM will send invites to potentially affected Tribal Nations prior to consultations. Tribal concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration. Federal, State, and local agencies, along with Indian Tribal Nations and other stakeholders that may be interested in or affected by the proposed Project that the BLM is evaluating, are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate in the development of the environmental analysis as a Cooperating Agency. The BLM will also provide additional opportunities for government-to-government consultation at other times during the NEPA process.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before October 28, 2023. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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.

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:

Key: State, County, Property Name, Multiple Name (if applicable), Address/Boundary, City, Vicinity, Reference Number.

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before October 21, 2023. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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.

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:

Key: State, County, Property Name, Multiple Name (if applicable), Address/Boundary, City, Vicinity, Reference Number.

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before November 4, 2023. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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.

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:

Key: State, County, Property Name, Multiple Name(if applicable), Address/Boundary, City, Vicinity, Reference Number.

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

Pursuant to the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996 (30 U.S.C. 1726) and 30 CFR part 1204, subpart C, ONRR and States can relieve the lessee of a marginal Federal oil and gas property from certain reporting, accounting, and auditing requirements. ONRR's rules under 30 CFR 1204.202 and 1204.203 authorize two relief options: (1) cumulative royalty reports and payments relief option, which allows a lessee or designee to submit one royalty report and payment during a calendar year; and (2) other requested relief, which allows a lessee or designee to request any type of appropriate marginal property accounting and auditing relief that meets the requirements under § 1204.5 and is not prohibited under § 1204.204.

To qualify for the first relief option, cumulative royalty reports and payments relief option, properties must produce less than 1,000 barrels-of-oil-equivalent (BOE) per year for the base period (July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023). Annual reporting relief will begin January 1, 2024, with the annual report and payment due February 28, 2025. If a lessee has an estimated payment on file, the payment due date is March 31, 2025. To qualify for the second relief option, other requested relief, the combined equivalent production of the marginal properties during the base period must equal an average daily well production of less than 15 BOE per well per day, as calculated under 30 CFR 1204.4(c).

Each State makes an annual determination as to whether it will participate in neither, one, or both relief options. This Notice fulfills the requirement in ONRR's rules to publish a notice of the State's “intent to allow or not allow certain relief options . . . in the Federal Register no later than 30 days before the beginning of the applicable calendar year.” See 30 CFR 1204.208(f).

The following table shows the States with qualifying marginal properties and those States' decisions on whether to participate in neither, one, or both relief options for calendar year 2024. An “N/A” means that no properties within the State met that condition for that type of relief:

Pursuant to 30 U.S.C. 1726(c), a Federal oil and gas property located in a State where ONRR does not share a portion of Federal royalties with that State (that is, for 2024, a State not listed in the table above) is eligible for relief if it qualifies as a marginal property. For more information on how to obtain relief, please refer to 30 CFR 1204.205.

Unless the information that ONRR receives is proprietary data, all correspondence, records, or information received in response to this notice may be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. ). If applicable, please highlight the proprietary portions, including any supporting documentation, or mark the page(s) containing proprietary data. ONRR protects proprietary information under the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905), FOIA Exemption 4 (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)), and the Department of the Interior's FOIA regulations (43 CFR part 2).

Authority: Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982, 30 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., as amended by Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996 (RSFA, Pub. L. 104-185—Aug. 13, 1996, as corrected by Pub. L. 104-200—Sept. 22, 1996).

The USIBWC is updating or eliminating active and inactive grazing leases in use for commercial, residential, or recreational purposes on federal land in the Falcon Project ( i.e., Falcon Dam and Reservoir). Rights-of-way for the Falcon Project totaled 63,192 acres on the U.S. side of the Falcon Project as of 2000. This project will assist USIBWC in determining if grazing leases should be allowed or discontinued and/or whether land management alternatives should be established in lieu of grazing.

The grazing lease program has continued for areas along the Falcon Reservoir that were originally ranches and farms before the land was acquired by the federal Government pursuant to the Water Treaty of 1944 between the U.S. and Mexico, with construction of the Falcon Project completed on October 19, 1953. The grazing lease program assured those areas not under water or flooded and owned by the federal Government would be economically used as they were in the past by the local community. Initially leases allowed for agricultural uses in addition to grazing, but agricultural activities and any clearing of leased lands were later restricted to reduce potential impacts on cultural resources in accordance with National Historic Preservation Act requirements. Active leases currently only allow grazing activities.

Grazing leases, licenses, and permits consist of any written permit or other legal document for an individual, corporation, etc., to use and improve land owned by the U.S. Government under the jurisdiction of the USIBWC at Falcon Reservoir. In the past, 22,270.57 acres of land were under 159 active grazing leases originally issued in 1956. As of 2020, there were 117 active grazing leases with many that are still held by the descendants of the original permittees and/or stakeholders.

The purpose for the Proposed Action is to successfully manage federal land in the Falcon Project. Federal lands associated with the Falcon Project have been utilized by the public for various activities, including grazing leases, since the Falcon Project was established. However, the economic value of these leases and the challenges to successful land management require a reevaluation of the grazing lease program. The need is to implement land management alternatives to grazing leases that address low grazing lease values, limited access by USIBWC to leased lands, and unauthorized activities on leased lands.

Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Final Regulations, and the USIBWC Operational Procedures for Implementing Section 102 of NEPA, published in the Federal Register September 2, 1981, USIBWC developed and analyzed eight alternatives for modifying the grazing lease program at the Falcon Project, including the No Action Alternative. Alternative 1, No Action Alternative, is a requirement of the NEPA process and is included to provide a baseline against which the other alternatives can be evaluated. The action alternatives include: Alternative 2—Terminate Leases, Alternative 3—Change Rental Rates on Active Leases and Implement Improved Program Management, Alternative 4—Allow Hunting on Existing Grazing Leases, Alternative 5—Terminate Leases Not Directly Accessible from Public Rights-of-Way, Alternative 6—Negotiate Access Easements on Private Property for Existing Leases, Alternative 7—Amend Leases to Allow Vegetation Management, and Alternative 8—Form a Citizens' Committee to Provide Lease Management Support. The USIBWC has identified that one or any combination of the alternatives could be implemented to manage the grazing lease program at the Falcon Project.

Potential impacts on natural, cultural, and other resources were evaluated in the Draft EA. The USIBWC prepared a FONSI for the Action Alternatives, based on a review of the facts and analyses contained in the Draft EA.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Written comments and recommendations for this information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function and entering either the title of the information collection or the OMB Control Number 1125-0017. This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Justice, information collections currently under review by OMB.

DOJ seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) years. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal. The DOJ notes that information collection requirements submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review.

1. Type of Information Collection: Revision and extension of a previously approved collection.

2. Title of the Form/Collection: Certification and Release of Records.

3. Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: EOIR-59, Executive Office for Immigration Review.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Individuals or households. The obligation to respond is optional and voluntary.

This ICR is used by EOIR to standardize and streamline requests for records related to cases or proceedings before EOIR pursuant to the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). An individual who is in or has been in proceedings before EOIR and seeks to authorize the disclosure of their information, including information retained in case files or a Record of Proceeding (documents, and if applicable, audio recordings), to an attorney, accredited representative, qualified organization, or other third party may use this form to authorize the disclosure. Revisions were made to the form to improve the Agency's implementation of the identity and guardianship verification requirements set forth in 28 CFR 16.41 and to ensure that privacy-protected information is not improperly released.

5. Obligation to Respond: Voluntary.

6. Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 55,475.

7. Estimated Time per Respondent: 10 minutes.

8. Frequency: Once a year or annually.

9. Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 9,246 hours.

10. Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

If additional information is required, contact: Darwin Arceo, Department Clearance Officer, Policy and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, United States Department of Justice, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 4W-218, Washington, DC 20530.

The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent ( i.e., employer) burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq. ) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).

OSHA does not mandate that employers establish fire brigades; however, if they do so, they must comply with the provisions of the Fire Brigades Standard. The provisions of the standard, including the paperwork requirements, apply to fire brigades, industrial fire departments, and private or contract fire departments, but not to airport crash rescue units or forest firefighting operations. Paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (c)(4) contain the paperwork requirements of the standard.

Under paragraph (b)(1) of the standard, employers must develop and maintain an organizational statement that establishes the: existence of a fire brigade; the basic organizational structure of the brigade; type, amount, and frequency of training provided to brigade members; expected number of members in the brigade; and functions that the brigade is to perform. This paragraph also specifies that the organizational statement must be available for review by workers, their designated representatives, and OSHA compliance officers. The organizational statement describes the functions performed by the brigade members and, thereby, determines the level of training and type of personal protective equipment (PPE) necessary for these members to perform their assigned functions safely. Making the statement available to workers, their designated representatives, and OSHA compliance officers ensures that the elements of the statement are consistent with the functions performed by the brigade members and the occupational hazards they experience, and that employers are providing training and PPE appropriate to these functions and hazards.

To permit a worker with known heart disease, epilepsy, or emphysema to participate in fire brigade emergency activities, paragraph (b)(2) of the standard requires employers to obtain a physician's certificate of the worker's fitness. This provision provides employers with a direct and efficient means of ascertaining whether or not they can safely expose workers with these medical conditions to the hazards of firefighting operations.

Paragraph (c)(4) of the standard requires employers to inform fire brigade members of special hazards, such as the storage and use of flammable liquids and gases, toxic chemicals, radioactive sources, water-reactive substances that may be present during fires and other emergencies, and any changes in these special hazards. It also requires that employers develop written procedures describing the actions that brigade members are to take when special hazards are present, and to make these procedures available in the education and training program and for review by brigade members.

OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:

• Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions to protect workers, including whether the information is useful;

• The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and

• Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply; for example, by using automated or other technological information collection, and transmission techniques.

OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information collection requirements contained in the Fire Brigades Standard (29 CFR 1910.156). The agency is requesting an adjustment decrease in burden hours from 2,767 to 2,695, a total decrease of 72 hours. The adjustment is due to a decrease in the number of manufacturing facilities with 100 or more workers from 25,546 to 24,885. Also, the number of responses decreased from 3,832 to 3,733.

OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend the approval of the information collection requirements.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Title: The Fire Brigades Standard (29 CFR 1910.156).

OMB Control Number: 1218-0075.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.

Number of Respondents: 24,885.

Number of Responses: 3,733.

Frequency of Responses: On occasion.

Average Time per Response: Varies.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 2,695.

Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

You may submit comments in response to this document as follows: (1) electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); if your comments, including attachments, are not longer than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at 202-693-1648; or (3) by hard copy. All comments, attachments, and other material must identify the agency name and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0009). You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files electronically.

Comments and submissions are posted without change at https://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about submitting personal information such as social security numbers and dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index, some information ( e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download from this website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on using the https://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and access the docket is available at the website's “User Tips” link.

Contact the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-2350, (TTY (877) 889-5627) for information about materials not available from the website, and for assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq. ) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393).

OSHA is providing notice that TUV SUD America, Inc. (TUVAM) is applying for expansion of the current recognition as a NRTL. TUVAM requests the addition of two recognized testing standards and one recognized testing site to the NRTL scope of recognition.

OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety testing and certification of the specific products covered within its scope of recognition. Each NRTL's scope of recognition includes (1) the type of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by its applicable test standard; and (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have the technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope. Recognition is not a delegation or grant of government authority; however, recognition enables employers to use products approved by the NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require product testing and certification.

The agency processes an application by a NRTL for initial recognition and for an expansion or renewal of this recognition, following requirements in Appendix A, 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires that the agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the application and provides its preliminary finding. In the second notice, the agency provides the final decision on the application. These notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or modifications of that scope. OSHA maintains an informational web page for each NRTL, including TUVAM, which details the NRTL's scope of recognition. These pages are available from the OSHA website at: https://www.osha.gov/nationally-recognized-testing-laboratory-program.

TUVAM currently has sixteen facilities (sites) recognized by OSHA for product testing and certification, with its headquarters located at: TUV SUD America, Inc., 401 Edgewater Place, Suite 500, Wakefield, MA 01880. A complete list of TUVAM's scope of recognition (including sites recognized by OSHA) is available at: https://www.osha.gov/nationally-recognized-testing-laboratory-program.

TUVAM submitted two applications to OSHA for expansion of the NRTL scope of recognition. The first application, dated June 8, 2020 (OSHA-2007-0043-0051), requested the expansion of the NRTL scope of recognition to include one additional test site located at: Daimlerstr, 40 Frankfurt am Main, Hessen 60314 Germany. The second application dated July 12, 2021 (OSHA-2007-0043-0052), requested the expansion of the NRTL scope of recognition to include two additional test standards that were removed from another NRTL expansion application (see OSHA-2007-0043-0042). In that application, TUVAM originally requested the addition of five standards to their scope of recognition on July 12, 2021. That application was amended to remove two standards, and the final Federal Register notice announcing the expansion of the NRTL scope of recognition to include the other three standards was published on June 29, 2022 (see 87 FR 38784). This notice covers the remaining two standards from the July 12, 2021, expansion application and the requested testing site. OSHA staff performed an on-site review of TUVAM's testing facilities at TUVAM Frankfurt on June 14-15, 2023, in which assessors found some nonconformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. TUVAM has addressed these issues sufficiently, and OSHA staff has preliminarily determined that OSHA should grant the applications.

Table 1 below lists the appropriate test standards found in TUVAM's applications for expansion for testing and certification of products under the NRTL Program.

TUVAM submitted acceptable applications for expansion of the NRTL scope of recognition. OSHA's review of the application file, and pertinent documentation, indicate that TUVAM can meet the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for expanding their recognition to include the addition of two additional testing standards and one additional testing site for NRTL testing and certification. This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim or temporary approval of TUVAM's applications. OSHA seeks comment on this preliminary determination.

OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether TUVAM meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of recognition as a NRTL. Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and exhibits.

Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request in writing, stating the reasons for the request by the due date for comments. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester justifies a longer time period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if it is not adequately justified.

To review copies of the exhibits identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to the docket, contact the Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. These materials also are generally available online at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. OSHA-2007-0043 (for further information, see the “ Docket” heading in the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES ).

OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a timely manner. After addressing the issues raised by these comments, staff will make a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health on whether to grant TUVAM's applications for expansion of the scope of recognition. The Assistant Secretary will make the final decision on granting the applications. In making this decision, the Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.

OSHA will publish a public notice of the final decision in the Federal Register .

James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the agency is issuing this notice pursuant to Section 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393; Sept. 18, 2020), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

A Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period was published on May 30, 2023, notifying the public of the agency's intent to seek OMB approval on generic clearance for qualitative feedback on agency service delivery; no comments were received as a result. However, the NTSB has since corrected a typographical error regarding the estimated average burden hours per respondent from 30 minutes to 5 minutes. This correction is consistent with the agency's total estimated annual burden hours of 1,250 for the 15,000 total estimated number of annual responses. Further, the NTSB has added to its list of the types of collections that this generic clearance covers. The NTSB is currently issuing this 30-Day notice, informing the public that the agency will now submit the following ICR to OMB and that all comments should be directed to OMB:

Title of Collection: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

Form Number: To be determined by specific collections.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Type of Review: Regular.

Type of Review Requested: 3 years from the date of approval.

Summary of the Collection of Information: With the goal of ensuring that the Federal Government provided the highest quality service as possible, Executive Order (E.O.) 12862 (Setting Customer Service Standards) was issued to set customer service standards to a level that either matched or exceeded the best service available in the private sector. Accordingly, E.O. 12862 directed Federal agencies to create customer surveys to obtain information on customer satisfaction. E.O. 14058 (Transforming Federal Customer Experience and Service Delivery to Rebuild Trust in Government) was later issued and reiterated the Federal Government's commitment to improve a customer's experience in an agency's service delivery. E.O. 14058 defined service delivery as an action related to a Federal benefit or service provided to a customer.

To ensure that the NTSB's service delivery is effective and meets its customer needs, the NTSB seeks OMB approval of a generic clearance to collect qualitative feedback on the agency's service delivery. This proposed IC provides a means to garner qualitative feedback in an efficient, timely manner in accordance with the commitment to improving service delivery.

Qualitative feedback is information that will provide insights into stakeholder perceptions, experiences, and expectations; provide an early warning of issues with service; or focus attention on areas where communication, training, or changes in operations might improve delivery of products and services. This feedback will allow for ongoing, collaborative, and actionable communications between the NTSB and its stakeholders. It will also allow for feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

The feedback solicited will target areas that include, but are not limited to: timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from stakeholders on the agency's services will be unavailable.

The agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:

• The collection is voluntary;

• The collection is low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and is low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;

• The collection is non-controversial and does not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near-future;

• Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;

• Information gathered is intended to be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency (if released, the agency must indicate the qualitative nature of the information);

• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and

• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study. The types of collections that this generic clearance covers include, but are not limited to:

• Customer comment cards/complaint forms.

• Qualitative customer satisfaction surveys ( e.g., post-meeting surveys; web surveys).

• In-person observation testing ( e.g., website or software usability tests).

• Small discussion groups.

• Focus Groups of customers, potential customers, delivery partners, or other stakeholders.

• Cognitive laboratory studies, such as those used to refine questions or assess usability of a website.

Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information, but it does not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: the target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such as collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

As a general matter, information collections under this request will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

Current Actions: New collection of information.

Type of Review: New Collection.

Affected Public: Individuals and Households, Businesses and Organizations, and State, Local, or Tribal Government.

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 1,250.

Estimated Average Burden Hours per Respondent: 5 minutes.

Frequency of Response: On occasion, per request.

Total Estimated No. of Annual Responses: 15,000.

The 1,250 annual burden hours requested are based on the number of collections the NTSB expects to conduct over the requested three-year period for this generic clearance.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: $0.

Participation in this collection is voluntary, and there are no costs to respondents beyond the time spent participating in the surveys.

Request for Comments: OMB is interested in comments that include: (1) whether the proposed collection is necessary for the NTSB to perform its mission; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the NTSB to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the IC; and (4) ways to minimize burden without reducing the quality of the IC.

On July 14, 2023, Kairos Power LLC (Kairos) submitted, pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, “Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,” an application (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML23195A121) for a construction permit for the `Hermes 2' test reactor facility (a “testing facility” as defined in 10 CFR 50.2), that would consist of two fluoride salt-cooled test reactor units at the East Tennessee Technology Park in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. A notice of receipt and availability was published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2023 (88 FR 51876). The NRC staff determined that Kairos submitted the application in accordance with 10 CFR 2.101(a)(5), and a notice of the acceptability of docketing of Kairos's application was published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2023 (88 FR 63632). The docket numbers established for this application are 50-611 and 50-612 for Units 1 and 2, respectively.

The NRC is considering issuance of a construction permit to Kairos that would authorize construction of the proposed Hermes 2 test reactor facility to be located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Hermes 2 facility would contain two fluoride-salt cooled, high-temperature test reactors using solid tri-structural isotropic fuel in pebble form. Each test reactor would contain an intermediate heat transfer loop and share a common power generation system.

Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 10 CFR part 2, “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure,” and part 50, notice is hereby given that an uncontested ( i.e., mandatory) hearing will be held, at a time and place to be set in the future by the Commission or designated by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board).

The hearing on the application for a construction permit filed by Kairos pursuant to 10 CFR part 50 will be conducted by a Board that will be designated by the Chief Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel or will be conducted by the Commission. If the hearing is conducted by a Board, notice as to the membership of the Board will be published in the Federal Register at a later date. The NRC staff will complete a detailed technical review of the application and will document its findings in a safety evaluation. The Commission will refer a copy of the application to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) in accordance with 10 CFR 50.58, “Hearings and Report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards,” and the ACRS will report on those portions of the application that concern safety. The NRC staff will also complete an environmental review of the application and will document its findings in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.” The staff will prepare an environmental assessment that will be used to determine whether an environmental impact statement is necessary or a finding of no significant impact is warranted to satisfy the NRC's NEPA obligations.

Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult 10 CFR 2.309. If a petition is filed, the presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii).

A State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or designated agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1) no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

For information about filing a petition and about participation by a person not a party under 10 CFR 2.315(c), see ADAMS Accession No. ML20340A053 ( https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?AccessionNumber=ML20340A053 ) and on the NRC website at https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing.html#participate.

All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including documents filed by an interested State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or designated agency thereof that requests to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases, to mail copies on electronic storage media, unless an exemption permitting an alternative filing method, as further discussed, is granted. Detailed guidance on electronic submissions is located in the “Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC” (ADAMS Accession No. ML13031A056) and on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.

To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. After a digital ID certificate is obtained and a docket created, the participant must submit adjudicatory documents in Portable Document Format. Guidance on submissions is available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. ET on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed to obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(b)-(d). Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving their documents on all other participants. Participants granted an exemption under 10 CFR 2.302(g)(2) must still meet the electronic formatting requirement in 10 CFR 2.302(g)(1), unless the participant also seeks and is granted an exemption from 10 CFR 2.302(g)(1).

Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is publicly available at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as previously described, click “cancel” when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants should not include copyrighted materials in their submission.

A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties to this proceeding may request access to documents containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI).

B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing, any potential party who believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice may request access to SUNSI. A “potential party” is any person who intends to participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing an admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI submitted later than 10 days after publication of this notice will not be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing, addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.

C. The requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Deputy General Counsel for Licensing, Hearings, and Enforcement, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email addresses for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and RidsOgcMailCenter.Resource@nrc.gov, respectively. 1 The request must include the following information:

(1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this Federal Register notice;

(2) The name and address of the potential party and a description of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed by the action identified in C.(1); and

(3) The identity of the individual or entity requesting access to SUNSI and the requestor's basis for the need for the information in order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding. In particular, the request must explain why publicly available versions of the information requested would not be sufficient to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention.

D. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under paragraph C, the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt of the request whether:

(1) There is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding; and

(2) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to SUNSI.

E. If the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both D.(1) and D.(2), the NRC staff will notify the requestor in writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or Protective Order  2 setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who will be granted access to SUNSI.

F. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that are based upon the information received as a result of the request made for SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.

G. Review of Denials of Access.

(1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff after a determination on standing and requisite need, the NRC staff shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the denial.

(2) The requestor may challenge the NRC staff's adverse determination by filing a challenge within 5 days of receipt of that determination with: (a) the presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if this individual is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.

(3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.

H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requestor may challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. Such a challenge must be filed within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) the presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if this individual is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.

If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10 CFR 2.311. 3

I. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers (and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. The attachment to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for processing and resolving requests under these procedures.

It is so ordered.

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2023-0197 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2023-0197.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-4737, or by email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. The License Amendment Request 23-03, as supplemented, to revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.8, “Auxiliary Saltwater (ASW) System,” is available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML23319A204 and ML23320A312, respectively.

• NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal rulemaking website ( https://www.regulations.gov ). Please include Docket ID NRC-2023-0197 in your comment submission.

The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-82, issued to PG&E, for operation of Diablo Canyon, Unit 2, located in San Luis Obispo County, California.

The proposed amendment would revise TS 3.7.8, “Auxiliary Saltwater (ASW) System,” to provide a revised TS 3.7.8 Condition A Note to allow a one-time completion time (CT) of 144 hours to replace the ASW System Pump 2-2 motor during Cycle 24 for Diablo Canyon, Unit 2.

Pursuant to the requirements of sections 50.91 and 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the licensee requested approval of the amendment under exigent circumstances. The need to replace the ASW Pump 2-2 motor occurred on an emergent basis due to indication of a potential degraded motor bearing. The ASW Pump 2-2 motor is currently OPERABLE but trends in bearing performance indicate that OPERABILITY could be impacted prior to the next scheduled Unit 2 refueling outage in April 2023. In order to maintain high plant safety, PG&E currently plans to begin replacement of the ASW Pump 2-2 motor the week of December 11, 2023. The circumstances requiring this exigent amendment request could not reasonably have been avoided. Oil samples collected from ASW pump 2-2 in January 2023 up until August 21, 2023, were within acceptance limits. On October 23, 2023, the ASW Pump 2-2 oil sample visually exhibited further discoloration compared to the sample collected on August 21, 2023, indicating that degradation had continued. As a result of the indication of a potential degraded ASW Pump 2-2 motor bearing on October 23, 2023, the associated analysis on October 27, 2023, indicating a further step change increase in particulate count, and as a prudent measure to maintain high reliability of the ASW pump, PG&E currently plans to begin replacement of the ASW Pump 2-2 motor on the week of December 11, 2023. The replacement of this motor will have no impact on the unit electrical load or electrical distribution systems.

Before any issuance of the proposed license amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and NRC's regulations.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC has made a proposed determination that the license amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration (NSHC). Under the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of NSHC, which is presented as follows:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the license amendment request involves a NSHC. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6), where the Commission finds that exigent circumstances exist, in that a licensee and the Commission must act quickly and that time does not permit the Commission to publish a Federal Register notice allowing 30 days for prior public comment, and it also determines that the amendment involves NSHCs, it can issue a Federal Register notice providing notice of an opportunity for hearing and allowing at least two weeks from the date of the notice for prior public comment. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6)(i)(A), the NRC staff is providing a 14-day notice period for public comment.

The NRC is seeking public comments on this proposed determination that the license amendment request involves NSHC. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, if circumstances change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves NSHC. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. If the Commission takes this action, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii).

If a hearing is requested and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of NHSC, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of NSHC, which will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves NHSC, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.

A State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or designated agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h) no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

For information about filing a petition and about participation by a person not a party under 10 CFR 2.315, see ADAMS Accession No. ML20340A053 ( https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?AccessionNumber=ML20340A053 ) and on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing.html#participate.

All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including documents filed by an interested State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or designated agency thereof that requests to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases, to mail copies on electronic storage media, unless an exemption permitting an alternative filing method, as further discussed, is granted. Detailed guidance on electronic submissions is located in the “Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC” (ADAMS Accession No. ML13031A056) and on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.

To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. After a digital ID certificate is obtained and a docket created, the participant must submit adjudicatory documents in Portable Document Format. Guidance on submissions is available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. ET on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed to obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(b)-(d). Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving their documents on all other participants. Participants granted an exemption under 10 CFR 2.302(g)(2) must still meet the electronic formatting requirement in 10 CFR 2.302(g)(1), unless the participant also seeks and is granted an exemption from 10 CFR 2.302(g)(1).

Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is publicly available at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as previously described, click “cancel” when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants should not include copyrighted materials in their submission.

For further details with respect to this action, see the application for license amendment dated November 14, 2023, as supplemented by letter dated November 16, 2023 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML23319A204 and ML23320A312, respectively).

Attorney for licensee: Jennifer Post, Esq. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 77 Beale Street, Room 3065, Mail Code B30A, San Francisco, CA 94105.

NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer L. Dixon-Herrity.

The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the Market Dominant or the Competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the Market Dominant or the Competitive product list.

Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.

The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's website ( http://www.prc.gov ). Non-public portions of the Postal Service's request(s), if any, can be accessed through compliance with the requirements of 39 CFR 3011.301. 1

The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern Market Dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3030, and 39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern Competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and 39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.

1. Docket No(s).: MC2024-52 and CP2024-53; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 13 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: November 15, 2023; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; Public Representative: Jennaca D. Upperman; Comments Due: November 27, 2023.