The Codex Alimentarius Commission was established in 1963 by two United Nations organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through adoption of food standards, codes of practice, and other guidelines developed by its committees, and by promoting their adoption and implementation by governments, Codex seeks to protect the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in the food trade.

The Terms of Reference of the Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA) are:

(a) to establish or endorse permitted maximum levels for individual food additives;

(b) to prepare priority lists of food additives for risk assessment by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives;

(c) to assign functional classes to individual food additives;

(d) to recommend specifications of identity and purity for food additives for adoption by the Commission;

(e) to consider methods of analysis for the determination of additives in food; and

(f) to consider and elaborate standards or codes for related subjects such as the labelling of food additives when sold as such.

The CCFA is hosted by China. The United States attends the CCFA as a member country of Codex.

The following items on the agenda for the 54th Session of the CCFA will be discussed during the public meeting:

At the public meeting on March 19, 2024, draft U.S. positions on the agenda items will be described and discussed, and attendees will have the opportunity to pose questions and offer comments. Written comments may be offered at the meeting or sent to Dr. Daniel Folmer, U.S. Alternate Delegate to the 54th Session of the CCFA, at Daniel.Folmer@fda.hhs.gov.

Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, the U.S. Codex Office will announce this Federal Register publication on-line through the USDA Codex web page located at: http://www.usda.gov/codex, a link that also offers an email subscription service providing access to information related to Codex. Customers can add or delete their subscriptions themselves and have the option to password protect their accounts.

No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs, exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to discrimination any person in the United States under any program or activity conducted by the USDA.

To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at https://www.usda.gov/oascr/filing-program-discrimination-complaint-usda-customer, or write a letter signed by you or your authorized representative. Send your completed complaint form or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email. Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410; Fax: (202) 690-7442; Email: program.intake@usda.gov. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

This notice is exempt from review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.

This action is not a rule as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) and thus is exempt from the provisions of this Act.

This notice does not contain reporting or recordkeeping requirements subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507).

This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs under No. 10.557 and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials (7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, 48 FR 29100, June 24, 1983, and 49 FR 22675, May 31, 1984).

Section 17(d)(2)(A) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1786(d)(2)(A)), requires the Secretary of Agriculture to establish income criteria to be used with nutritional risk criteria in determining a person's eligibility for participation in the WIC Program. The law provides that persons will be income-eligible for the WIC Program if they are members of families that satisfy the income standard prescribed for reduced-price school meals under section 9(b) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(b)). Under section 9(b), the income limit for reduced-price school meals is 185 percent of the Federal poverty guidelines, as adjusted.

Section 9(b) also requires that these guidelines be revised annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index. The annual revision for 2024 was published by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) at 89 FR 2961 on January 17, 2024. The guidelines published by HHS are referred to as the “poverty guidelines.”

Program Regulations at 7 CFR 246.7(d)(1) specify that State agencies may prescribe income guidelines either equaling the income guidelines established under Section 9 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act for reduced-price school meals, or identical to State or local guidelines for free or reduced-price health care. However, in conforming WIC income guidelines to State or local health care guidelines, the State cannot establish WIC guidelines which exceed the guidelines for reduced-price school meals, or which are less than 100 percent of the Federal poverty guidelines. Consistent with the method used to compute income eligibility guidelines for reduced-price meals under the National School Lunch Program, the poverty guidelines were multiplied by 1.85 and the results rounded upward to the next whole dollar.

Currently, the Department is publishing the maximum and minimum WIC income eligibility guidelines by household size for the period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025. Consistent with section 17(f)(17) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1786(f)(17)), a State agency may implement the revised WIC income eligibility guidelines concurrently with the implementation of income eligibility guidelines under the Medicaid Program established under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396, et seq. ). State agencies may coordinate implementation with the revised Medicaid guidelines, i.e., earlier in the year, but in no case may implementation take place later than July 1, 2024. State agencies that do not coordinate implementation with the revised Medicaid guidelines must implement the WIC income eligibility guidelines on or before July 1, 2024.

The table of this Notice contains the income limits by household size for the 48 contiguous States, the District of Columbia, and all United States Territories, including Guam. Separate tables for Alaska and Hawaii have been included for the convenience of the State agencies because the poverty guidelines for Alaska and Hawaii are higher than for the 48 contiguous States.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1786.

The purpose of the meetings are to:

1. Hear from Title II project proponents and discuss Title II project proposals;

2. Make funding recommendations on Title II projects;

3. Approve meeting minutes; and

4. Schedule the next meeting.

The agenda will include time for individuals to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should make a request in writing at least three days prior to the meeting date to be scheduled on the agenda for that particular meeting. Written comments may be submitted to the Forest Service up to 10 days after the meeting date listed under DATES .

Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , by or before the deadline, for all questions related to the meeting. All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are placed in the record and are available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received upon request.

Meeting Accommodations: The meeting location is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the USDA provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpretation, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation to the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section or contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Equal opportunity practices in accordance with USDA's policies will be followed in all appointments to the Committee. To ensure that the recommendations of the Committee have taken in account the needs of the diverse groups served by USDA, membership shall include to the extent possible, individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Proposed and Interim Directives

Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1612(a) and 36 CFR part 216, the Forest Service publishes for public comment Agency directives that formulate standards, criteria, and guidelines applicable to Forest Service programs. Agency procedures for providing public notice and opportunity to comment are specified in Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1109.12, Chapter 30, Providing Public Notice and Opportunity to Comment on Directives.

The following proposed directives are planned for publication for public comment from January 1, 2024, to March 31, 2024:

The following proposed directives have been published for public comment but have not yet been finalized:

No final directives have been issued since October 1, 2023.

Overview

Federal Awarding Agency Name: Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Housing Service, Rural Utilities Service.

Funding Opportunity Title: Strategic Economic and Community Development.

Announcement Type: Notice of Solicitation of Applications.

Funding Opportunity Number: The following covered programs with their Assistance Listing (AL) numbers are listed as flows:

• Community Facilities Loans; see 7 CFR part 1942, subpart A.

• Community Facilities Grants; see 7 CFR part 3570, subpart B.

• Community Facilities Guaranteed Loans; see 7 CFR part 5001.

• Water and Waste Disposal Programs Guaranteed Loans; see 7 CFR part 5001.

• Water and Waste Loans and Grants; see 7 CFR part 1780.

• Rural Business Development Grants; see 7 CFR part 4280, subpart E.

Dates: See information provided in the DATES section of this notice.

Rural Development Key Priorities: The Agency encourages applicants to consider projects that will advance the following key priorities:

• Addressing Climate Change and Environmental Justice. Reducing climate pollution and increasing resilience to the impacts of climate change through economic support to rural communities.

• Advancing Racial Justice, Place-Based Equity, and Opportunity. Ensuring all rural residents have equitable access to RD programs and benefits from RD funded projects.

• Creating More and Better Market Opportunities. Assisting rural communities recover economically through more and better market opportunities and through improved infrastructure.

For further information on FY 24 Rural Development Priorities, please visit the following website: Rural Development Priorities: FY 2024 | Rural Development ( usda.gov ).

SECD supports projects that promote and partially or completely implement strategic community investment plans. These plans use the unique strengths of rural communities to advance prosperity. USDA RD helps finance and/or fund these projects to build community prosperity by using community assets, identifying resources, convening partners, and leveraging Federal, state, local or private funding.

In FY 2024, the Agency plans to implement SECD through reserving funds from the covered programs' appropriations as provided in 7 CFR part 1980, subpart K. This notice provides requirements to applicants submitting applications for the covered programs' reserved funds and establishes the above-mentioned priority effective upon the publication of this notice.

These funds are made available under Section 379H of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2008v).

Section 379H of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2008v.), authorizes any program under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (Pub. L. 87-128), as determined by the Secretary, to give priority to applications that support the implementation of multi-jurisdictional and multi-sectoral strategic community investment plans.

Accordingly, the Agency is giving priority to projects implementing strategic community investment plans in FY 24 through the following RD programs:

• Community Facilities Loans; see 7 CFR part 1942, subpart A.

• Community Facilities Grants; see 7 CFR part 3570, subpart B.

• Community Facilities Guaranteed Loans; see 7 CFR part 5001.

• Water and Waste Disposal Programs Guaranteed Loans; see 7 CFR part 5001.

• Water and Waste Loans and Grants; see 7 CFR part 1780.

• Rural Business Development Grants; see 7 CFR part 4280, subpart E.

The Agency will review, evaluate, and score each application based on the criteria specified in 7 CFR 1980.1020, to award points for each program's competition for the SECD reserved funds.

Type of Awards: Guaranteed loans, direct loans and grants.

Fiscal Year Funds: FY 2024 appropriated funds.

Available Funds: The amount of reserved funds available for SECD projects is dependent on the amount of available appropriated funding provided to each of the covered programs during the fiscal year. The NOSA is being issued prior to passage of a final appropriations act for FY 2024. Funding for the SECD covered programs in FY 2023 was $409,892,029, however, funding for FY 2024 will not be known until Congress passes an appropriations act for FY 2024. Successful applications will be selected by the Agency for funding and subsequently awarded to the extent that funding may ultimately be made available through appropriations. The Agency advises that all interested parties bear the financial burden of preparing and submitting an application in response to this Notice whether or not funding is appropriated for this program in FY 2024.

For FY 2024 applications, the following table specifies the percentage of funds being reserved for the covered SECD programs:

Award Amounts: Guaranteed loans, direct loans and grants will be awarded in amounts consistent with each applicable covered program.

Anticipated Award Dates: Awards for SECD applications submitted to the covered programs in FY 24 will be obligated on or before June 30, 2024. The Agency will return any reserved funds that are not obligated by the obligation deadline to each covered program's regular funding account for obligation of eligible projects in that program.

Performance Period: Performance period will vary by covered program.

Renewal or Supplemental Awards: N/A.

Type of Assistance Instrument: Grants, direct loans, and loan guarantees.

To be considered for SECD reserved funds, both the applicant and project must meet the eligibility requirements of the covered program. These requirements vary among the covered programs and applicants should refer to the regulations for those programs, which are referenced in Section A.2. of this notice.

The agency supports community and regional planning through the SECD regulation without making any changes to the applicant eligibility requirements of the covered programs. The SECD regulation includes three criteria that a project must meet to be considered for the SECD reserve funding (see 7 CFR 1980.1010):

The first criterion, as noted above, is that the project meets the applicable eligibility requirements of the covered program for which the applicant is applying.

The second criterion is that the project is “carried out in a rural area” as defined in 7 CFR 1980.1005. As defined, this means either the entire project is physically located in a rural area, or all the beneficiaries of the service(s) provided through the project must either reside in or be located in a rural area. Note that the definition of “rural” varies among the covered programs and the SECD regulation (7 CFR part 1980, subpart K) does not change those definitions. Therefore, the applicable program regulations as outlined in Section A.2 of this notice should be reviewed as necessary.

The third criterion is that the project supports partial or complete implementation of a strategic community investment plan on a multi-jurisdictional and multi-sectoral basis as defined in 7 CFR 1980.1005.

To be considered for the reserved funds from covered programs in FY 2024, applicants must: (1) meet all requirements of the covered program; (2) meet all requirements in accordance with 7 CFR part 1980, subpart K (see 7 CFR 1980.1010); and (3) submit Form RD 1980-88 and the supporting documentation required in 7 CFR 1080.1015 with their program application which includes:

• Sufficient information to show that the project will be carried out in a rural area, as defined by the appropriate covered program; and

• Identification of any current or previous applications the applicant has submitted for funds from the covered programs.

All cost sharing, matching, and cost participation requirements of the applicable covered program apply to projects seeking SECD reserved funds.

All other eligibility requirements (beyond those identified in Section C.1 of this notice) found in the covered programs' regulations applying to applicants, their projects, and the beneficiaries of those projects are unchanged by either this notice or the regulations for the SECD program (7 CFR part 1980, subpart K).

Information on how to submit applications is provided in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Applicants must submit the Form RD 1980-88, “Strategic Economic and Community Development (Section 6401) Priority,” located at https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/business-programs/strategic-economic-and-community-development#to-apply, with their program application to the appropriate covered program.

(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 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-25. To register in SAM, entities will be required to obtain a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). Instructions for obtaining the UEI are available at https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration.

(b) 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) Applicant must ensure they complete the Financial Assistance General Certifications and Representations in SAM.

(d) Applicant must provide a valid UEI in its application, unless determined exempt under 2 CFR 25.110 ( https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-25/subpart-A/section-25.110 ).

(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.

Each of the participating covered programs has different established deadlines for receipt of applications. Please refer to the Agency website or the appropriate covered program's Federal Register Notice for application deadline information. The Agency will not solicit or consider new scoring or eligibility information that is submitted after the application deadline. The covered RD programs also reserve the right to ask applicants for clarifying information and additional verification of assertions in the application.

This Notice is not subject to Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.”

All applicants are responsible for any expenses incurred in preparing and submitting applications.

(a) SECD applications must be submitted electronically to the USDA RD Office servicing the area where the project is located. RD State Offices can be found here: https://www.rd.usda.gov/about-rd/state-offices.

(b) Water and Waste Loans and Grant Program must submit SECD applications electronically at https://rdapply.sc.egov.usda.gov/.

(c) For lenders assigned an OneRD Loan Guarantee Initiative Customer Relationship Manager (CRM), SECD applications must be submitted to their assigned CRM.

All FY 2024 applications for covered programs will be reviewed, evaluated, and scored based on the covered program's scoring criteria. This notice does not affect that process. This notice only affects the scoring of SECD applications competing for a covered program's SECD reserve funds.

For applicants wishing to be considered for reserved SECD funds in FY 24, the Agency will review, evaluate, and score each application based on the criteria specified in 7 CFR 1980.1020, to award points for each covered program's SECD reserved funds.

The Agency will prioritize applications competing for a covered program's reserved funds based on the covered program's awarded points plus the SECD earned points to determine which projects receive reserved funds. SECD points awarded are added to the covered program's application score to elevate and prioritize projects for accessing reserved funds. The RD covered programs reserve the right to offer the applicant less than the funding requested.

The Agency will notify SECD applicants who receive funding in a manner consistent with award notifications for the covered program.

Any and all additional requirements of the applicable covered programs apply to projects receiving funding in response to this notice. Please see the regulations for the applicable covered program.

Any and all post-award covered program reporting requirements apply to all projects receiving reserved funds in response to this notice.

For general questions about this notice, please contact your respective Rural Development State Office listed at: https://www.rd.usda.gov/about-rd/state-offices and other points of contact provided in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

Funding to Non-Federal Entities. Awardees that are Non-Federal Entities, defined pursuant to 2 CFR 200.1 as any State, local government, Indian tribe, Institution of Higher Education, or nonprofit organization, shall be governed by the requirements of Section 70914 of the Build America, Buy America Act (BABAA) within the IIJA. Any requests for waiver of these requirements must be submitted pursuant to USDA's guidance available online at https://www.usda.gov/ocfo/federal-financial-assistance-policy/USDABuyAmericaWaiver.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collection requirements contained in 7 CFR part 1980, subpart K, have been approved by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 070-0068.

All projects to be financed under this notice are subject to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), and RD's environmental regulation at 7 CFR part 1970 (Environmental Policies and Procedures).

All applicants, in accordance with 2 CFR part 25, must have an UEI number and must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to submitting an application. Applicants may register for the SAM and locate or register for a UEI number at http://www.sam.gov/SAM. All recipients of Federal financial grant assistance are required to report information about first-tier sub-awards and executive total compensation in accordance with 2 CFR part 170. Applicants must ensure they complete the Financial Assistance General Certifications and Representations in SAM.

Programs referenced in this Notice are subject to applicable Civil Rights Laws.

These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

In accordance with Federal civil rights laws and USDA civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Mission Areas, agencies, staff offices, employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Program information may be made available in languages other than English. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication to obtain program information ( e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language) should contact the responsible Mission Area, agency, staff office, or the 711 Relay Service.

To file a program discrimination complaint, a complainant should complete a Form AD-3027, USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which can be obtained online at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ad-3027.pdf, from any USDA office, by calling (866) 632-9992, or by writing a letter addressed to USDA. The letter must contain the complainant's name, address, telephone number, and a written description of the alleged discriminatory action in sufficient detail to inform the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights about the nature and date of an alleged civil rights violation.

The completed AD-3027 form or letter must be submitted to USDA by:

(1) Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410; or

(2) Fax: (833) 256-1665 or (202) 690-7442; or

(3) Email: program.intake@usda.gov.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

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.

Members of the public may join online or listen to this discussion through the above registration link or call-in number. An open comment period 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. Closed captions will be provided. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind, 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 conference 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 meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski at mwojnaroski@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 meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Arkansas 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.

Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, the notice for this meeting is given less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting because of the exceptional circumstance of the upcoming expiration of the current Committee appointment term and the resulting timeline under which the Committee must complete its next and final project.

In the Federal Register of December 22, 2023, in FR DOC 28265, on page 88584, remove the following names from the Appendix: Bansidhar Chiranjilal; Norma (India) Limited; R. N. Gupta & Company Limited; Uma Shanker Khandelwal & Co.; and USK Exports Private Limited.

On December 22, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register the final results of the administrative review of the AD order on finished carbon steel flanges from India. 1 The Appendix in the Final Results was intended to be a list of companies not selected for individual examination. However, it mistakenly included companies that were selected for individual examination, specifically Bansidhar Chiranjilal, Norma (India) Limited, R. N. Gupta & Company Limited, Uma Shanker Khandelwal & Co., and USK Exports Private Limited. Commerce will ensure that the cash deposit and liquidation instructions it issues to U.S. Customs and Border Protection following publication of this correction notice reflect the application of the dumping margin determined in the Final Results for the non-selected companies listed in the Appendix to this notice. A corrected list of companies not selected for individual examination is in the Appendix of this notice.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on December 18, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register its affirmative final determination in the countervailing duty investigation of brass rod from India. 1 On February 1, 2024, the ITC notified Commerce of its final affirmative determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of brass rod from India, within the meaning of sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 702(d) of the Act. 2

The product covered by this order is brass rod from India. For a complete description of the scope of this order, see the appendix to this notice.

On February 1, 2024, in accordance with sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of brass rod from India. 3 Therefore, in accordance with 705(c)(2) and 706 of the Act, Commerce is issuing this countervailing duty order. Because the ITC determined that imports of brass rod from India are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption are subject to the assessment of countervailing duties.

Therefore, in accordance with section 706(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties on all relevant entries of brass rod from India. Countervailing duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of brass rod from India which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after September 29, 2023, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination , 4 but will not be assessed on entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, as further described in the “Provisional Measures” section below.

In accordance with section 706 of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all relevant entries of brass rod from India, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

Commerce also intends, pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, to instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination in the Federal Register , CBP will require, at the same time as importers would deposit estimated normal customs duties on the subject merchandise, a cash deposit for each entry of subject merchandise equal to the subsidy rates listed below. 5 The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed below, as appropriate.

Section 703(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation instructions issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. Commerce published its Preliminary Determination on September 29, 2023. 7 Therefore, the provisional measures period, beginning on the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination, ended on January 27, 2024. Pursuant to section 707(b) of the Act, the collection of cash deposits at the rates listed above will begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination.

Therefore, in accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate without regard to countervailing duties, unliquidated entries of brass rod from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 27, 2024, the date on which the provisional measures expired, through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register. Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination in the Federal Register .

On September 20, 2021, Commerce published the Final Rule in the Federal Register . 8 On September 27, 2021, Commerce also published the Procedural Guidance in the Federal Register . 9 The Final Rule and Procedural Guidance provide that Commerce will maintain an annual inquiry service list for each order or suspended investigation, and any interested party submitting a scope ruling application or request for circumvention inquiry shall serve a copy of the application or request on the persons on the annual inquiry service list for that order, as well as any companion order covering the same merchandise from the same country of origin. 10

In accordance with the Procedural Guidance, for orders published in the Federal Register after November 4, 2021, Commerce will create an annual inquiry service list segment in Commerce's online e-filing and document management system, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Electronic Service System (ACCESS), available at https://access.trade.gov/ , within five business days of publication of the notice of the order. Each annual inquiry service list will be saved in ACCESS, under each case number, and under a specific segment type called “AISL-Annual Inquiry Service List.”  11

Interested parties who wish to be added to the annual inquiry service list for an order must submit an entry of appearance to the annual inquiry service list segment for the order in ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of the order. For ease of administration, Commerce requests that law firms with more than one attorney representing interested parties in an order designate a lead attorney to be included on the annual inquiry service list. Commerce will finalize the annual inquiry service list within five business days thereafter. As mentioned in the Procedural Guidance, the new annual inquiry service list will be in place until the following year, when the Opportunity Notice for the anniversary month of the order is published.

Commerce may update an annual inquiry service list at any time as needed based on interested parties' amendments to their entries of appearance to remove or otherwise modify their list of members and representatives, or to update contact information. Any changes or announcements pertaining to these procedures will be posted to the ACCESS website at https://access.trade.gov.

In the Final Rule, Commerce stated that, “after an initial request and placement on the annual inquiry service list, both petitioners and foreign governments will automatically be placed on the annual inquiry service list in the years that follow.”  13 Accordingly, as stated above, the petitioner and the Government of India should submit its initial entry of appearance after publication of this notice in order to appear in the first annual inquiry service list for this order. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(n)(3), the petitioner and the Government of India will not need to resubmit their entries of appearance each year to continue to be included on the annual inquiry service list. However, the petitioner and the Government of India are responsible for making amendments to their entries of appearance during the annual update to the annual inquiry service list in accordance with the procedures described above.

This notice constitutes the countervailing duty order with respect to brass rod from India pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of duty orders currently in effect at https://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

This CVD order is published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

On February 15, 2019, Commerce published in the Federal Register the countervailing duty order on truck and bus tires from China. 1 On February 2, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register the notice of initiation of an administrative review of the Order. 2 On May 19, 2022, Commerce selected Qingdao Ge Rui Da Rubber Co., Ltd. and Bridgestone (Shenyang) Tire Co., Ltd. (Bridgestone Shenyang) for individual examination as the mandatory respondents in this administrative review. 3 On June 12, 2023, Bridgestone Corporation, Bridgestone Tire Co. Ltd. (Bridgestone Tire), and Bridgestone Shenyang (collectively, Bridgestone Companies) withdrew their request for administrative review. 4 On June 20, 2023, we selected Jiangsu Hankook Tire Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu Hankook) for individual examination. 5 On July 3, 2023, Jiangsu Hankook withdrew its request for review. 6 On September 8, 2023, we selected Jiangsu General Science Technology Co., Ltd. (General Science) for individual examination and requested that the GOC forward the initial questionnaire. 7 On September 29, 2023, Commerce extended the deadline for the preliminary results of review by 100 days, until February 8, 2024. 8

For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 9 A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix I to this notice. The Preliminary 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 http://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The products covered by the Order are truck and bus tires. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 10

On December 21, 2023, the Government of Armenia (GOA) submitted a letter to Commerce requesting that Commerce conduct a review of Armenia's status as an NME country  1 within the context of a changed circumstances review (CCR) of the AD order on aluminum foil from Armenia. 2 In its CCR Request, the GOA describes changes that have occurred in Armenia in recent years as they relate to each of the statutory criteria Commerce uses to evaluate a country's market economy (ME) status. Specifically, the CCR Request provides information about the convertibility of the Armenian Dram, how wage rates in Armenia are determined by free bargaining between labor and management, and the extent to which joint ventures and other investments by firms from other countries are permitted in Armenia. The CCR Request also provides information on government ownership and control over the means of production and the allocation of resources in Armenia, as well as the government's influence over enterprises' price and output decisions. Finally, the GOA provided its views on other factors that could affect its ME status, including its persistent fight against government corruption and various reforms enacted in conjunction with its accession to the World Trade Organization.

Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), when Commerce receives information concerning, or a request from an interested party for a review of, a final affirmative determination that resulted in an AD or countervailing duty order, which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of such determination, Commerce shall conduct a review of the determination after publishing notice of the review in the Federal Register . Commerce finds that the GOA has provided sufficient evidence to initiate a review of Armenia's NME status. Therefore, in response to this request, Commerce is initiating this CCR to examine whether Armenia is still an NME country for purposes of the application of the AD law, pursuant to sections 751(b) and 771(18)(C)(ii) of the Act. Commerce has treated Armenia as an NME country in all past AD investigations and administrative reviews. 3 An NME designation remains in effect until it is revoked by Commerce. 4

On October 10, 2023, Commerce published the Preliminary Results and invited interested parties to comment. 1 No interested party submitted comments on the Preliminary Results . Accordingly, the final results remain unchanged from the Preliminary Results . Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The merchandise covered by the Order is ESB rubber from Mexico. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

The Act and Commerce's regulations do not address the establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for companies which were not selected for individual examination in an administrative review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally “an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely {on the basis of facts available}.”

However, pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, if the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for all exporters and producers individually examined are zero, de minimis, or determined based entirely on facts otherwise available, Commerce may use any reasonable method to establish the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for all other producers or exporters.

For these final results, we continue to determine that the weighted-average dumping margin for Negromex is zero percent. Therefore, we are applying a rate of zero percent to the companies not selected for individual examination in accordance with section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act.

In the Preliminary Results, Commerce determined that Dynasol Elastomeros did not have suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR. 3 No parties commented on Commerce's preliminary no-shipment determination. Therefore, for these final results, we continue to determine that Dynasol Elastomeros had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR.

In the Preliminary Results, we notified parties of our intent to rescind this administrative review for Dynasol, as it is a U.S. importer and is, therefore, not eligible for review. 4 Because we continue to find that Dynasol is not eligible for review, we are rescinding this review with respect to Dynasol.

We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR, September 1, 2021, through August 31, 2022:

Because Commerce received no comments on the Preliminary Results, we have not modified our analysis and no decision memorandum accompanies this Federal Register notice. We are adopting the Preliminary Results as the final results of this review. Consequently, there are no new calculations to disclose in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b) for these final results.

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. For Negromex, because its weighted-average dumping margin is zero, we will instruct CBP to liquidate entries reported in this review without regard to antidumping duties. Consistent with Commerce's assessment practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Negromex for which it did not know its 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

For the companies which were not selected for individual examination, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. Further, because we continue to find that Dynasol Elastomeros had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR, we will instruct CBP to liquidate any suspended entries of subject merchandise associated with Dynasol Elastomeros at the all-others rate. For Dynasol, for which this administrative review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at a rate equal to the cash deposit of 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 assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 41 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register , in accordance with 19 CFR 356.8(a).

The following cash deposit requirements for estimated antidumping duties will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review in the Federal Register , as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the companies under review will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported by a producer or exporter 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 for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the producer has been covered in a completed segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established 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 19.52 percent, 6 the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice also 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 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 duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

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

We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5) and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce published the notice of initiation of this investigation on August 7, 2023. 1 On November 27, 2023, Commerce postponed the preliminary determination of this investigation until February 7, 2023. 2

For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 3 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as appendix II to this notice. The Preliminary 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 Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The product covered by this investigation is pea protein from China. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see appendix I.

In accordance with the preamble to Commerce's regulations, 4 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope). 5 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this investigation, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum. 6 Commerce is not preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. See the scope in Appendix I to this notice.

Commerce is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, Commerce preliminarily has relied upon facts otherwise available, with adverse inferences, for the China-wide entity. For a full description of the methodology underlying Commerce's preliminary determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

In accordance with section 733(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c), Commerce preliminarily determines that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of pea protein from China for the separate-rate companies and the China-wide entity. For a full description of the methodology and results of Commerce's critical circumstances analysis, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

In the Initiation Notice, 7 Commerce stated that it would calculate producer/exporter combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice. 8 In this investigation, we calculated producer/exporter combination rates for respondents eligible for separate rates.

We have preliminarily granted a separate rate to certain separate rate respondents that we did not select for individual examination. 9 In calculating the rate for non-individually examined separate rate respondents in a non-market economy LTFV investigation, Commerce normally looks to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, which pertains to the calculation of the all-others rate in a market economy LTFV investigation, for guidance. Pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, normally this rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for those companies individually examined, excluding zero and de minimis dumping margins, and any dumping margins based entirely under section 776 of the Act. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins in this preliminary determination are based entirely under section 776 of the Act. In investigations where no estimated weighted-average dumping margins other than zero, de minimis, or those determined entirely under section 776 of the Act have been established for individually examined entities, in accordance with section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, Commerce typically calculates a simple average of the margins alleged in the petition and applies the results to all other entities not individually examined. 10 The simple average of the petition rates is 122.19 percent. 11 See the table below in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice.

Commerce preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist:  12

These events, combined with the previous notice of public meetings and availability of reports published in November 2023 (88 FR 80275) comprise the Pacific Council's complete schedule for determining the annual proposed and final modifications to ocean salmon fishery management measures. The meeting notices and agendas for the March and April 2024 Pacific Council meetings will be published in subsequent Federal Register documents prior to the actual meetings.

For public meetings held online, specific meeting information, including instructions on how to join the meeting and system requirements will be provided in meeting announcements on the Pacific Council's website (see www.pcouncil.org ). You may send an email to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt ( kris.kleinschmidt@noaa.gov ) or contact him at (503) 820-2412 for technical assistance.

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

Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt ( kris.kleinschmidt@noaa.gov; (503) 820-2412) at least 10 days prior to the meeting date.

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

This is a request for an extension of an approved information collection. The NMFS Southeast Regional Office manages three commercial individual fishing quota (IFQ) and individual transferable quota (ITQ) programs in the NMFS Southeast Region under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. The IFQ programs for red snapper, and groupers and tilefishes occur in Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf), and the ITQ program for wreckfish occurs in Federal waters of the South Atlantic.

The NMFS Southeast Regional Office proposes to extend the information collection currently approved under OMB Control Number 0648-0551. This collection of information tracks the transfer and use of IFQ and ITQ shares, and IFQ allocation and landings by commercial fishermen necessary for NMFS to operate, administer, and review management of the IFQ and ITQ programs. Regulations for the IFQ and ITQ programs are located at 50 CFR part 622. NMFS proposes no revisions to the existing information collections for the IFQ and ITQ programs approved under OMB Control Number 0648-0551.

Information for the Gulf red snapper, and grouper and tilefish IFQ programs is collected electronically via a web-based system, through satellite-linked vessel monitoring systems, through a 24-hour call line, and with paper form submission for landing corrections, closing an account, and account applications, as well as landing transactions under catastrophic circumstances.

The share transfer process in the wreckfish ITQ program requires the signatures of witnesses on paper forms. The wreckfish ITQ program remains paper-based until the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and NMFS consider whether to implement an electronic system.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0551.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular submission—extension of a current information collection.

Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,064.

Estimated Time per Response:

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,397.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $651 in recordkeeping and reporting costs.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory, required to obtain or retain benefits.

Legal Authority: Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department/Bureau to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

In August 2019, the USPTO issued a request for public comments on patenting AI-assisted inventions. 1 Among the various policy questions raised in the notice, the USPTO requested comments on several issues involving inventorship, such as the different ways a natural person can contribute to the conception of an AI-assisted invention. In October 2020, the USPTO published a report titled “Public Views on Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Policy,” which took a comprehensive look at the stakeholder feedback received in response to the questions posed in the August 2019 notice. 2 In June 2022, the USPTO held its inaugural Artificial Intelligence/Emerging Technologies Partnership meeting, which included a panel discussion on “Inventorship and the Advent of Machine Generated Inventions.”  3 The USPTO later issued a “Request for Comments Regarding Artificial Intelligence and Inventorship” (RFC) on February 14, 2023. 4 This RFC asked 11 questions, mostly regarding the issues involving AI and patent inventorship. On April 25 and May 8, 2023, the USPTO held public listening sessions at the USPTO headquarters and Stanford University, respectively. During these listening sessions, the USPTO heard from 32 public speakers, and the events were attended by over 800 attendees, both in person and virtually. The USPTO has received 69 written comments from a diverse group of stakeholders. Comments received in response to the RFC can be viewed on the Regulations.gov docket page. 5 As illustrated above, the USPTO has actively engaged with our stakeholders and has received extensive input from the public on inventorship for AI-assisted inventions. Notably, numerous commenters expressly agreed that the USPTO should provide guidance regarding inventorship and the patentability of AI-assisted inventions.

Recognizing that “[r]esponsible AI use has the potential to help solve urgent challenges while making our world more prosperous, productive, innovative, and secure,” while “[a]t the same time, irresponsible use could exacerbate societal harms such as fraud, discrimination, bias, and disinformation; displace and disempower workers; stifle competition; and pose risks to national security,” President Biden issued the “Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence” on October 30, 2023 (Executive Order). The Executive Order sets forth policy and principles, including that:

Under section 5.2(c)(i) of the Executive Order (Promoting Innovation and Competition), the Executive Order provides that:

CPSC seeks to extend the following currently approved collection of information, and to revise it to include additional forms of qualitative studies:

Title: Focus Groups and Other Qualitative Studies.

OMB Number: 3041-0136.

Type of Review: Extension and revision of collection.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Affected Public: Consumers.

Estimated Number of Respondents: CPSC estimates that this collection will involve 2,620 participants, including prospective focus group participants who are screened but ultimately not selected for participation.

Estimated Time per Response: We estimate that the average response time for each participant will be 1.1 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Burden: Based on CPSC's estimates that 2,620 participants will each spend an average of 1.1 hours responding to the collection, CPSC estimates that the total annual burden of this collection is 2,882 hours. The annualized cost to respondents for the information collection is $124,675.32 (2,882 hours × $43.26/hour), as estimated from total compensation data available from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1

General Description of Collection: Section 5(a) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2054(a), authorizes the Commission to conduct studies and investigations relating to the causes and prevention of deaths, accidents, injuries, illnesses, other health impairments, and economic losses associated with consumer products. Section 5(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2054(b), further provides that the Commission may conduct research, studies, and investigations on the safety of consumer products. The Commission may also test consumer products and develop product safety test methods and testing devices.

To help identify and evaluate product-related incidents, Commission staff invites and obtains direct feedback from consumers on issues related to product safety, such as recall effectiveness, product use, and perceptions regarding safety issues. The information that CPSC collects from future focus groups—including usability studies and ethnographic studies for consumer products, which are being added to this revised collection—will help inform the Commission's identification and evaluation of consumer products and product uses by providing insight and information into consumer perceptions and usage patterns. In some cases, one-on-one interviews may be conducted as a more in-depth extension of a focus group, or in place of a traditional focus group or study. This information may also assist the Commission in its efforts to support voluntary standards activities and help CPSC identify emerging consumer safety issues requiring additional research. In addition, based on the information obtained, CPSC may be able to improve the readability and comprehension of safety information provided to the public.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Experiences of Junior Soldiers in Alaska; OMB Control Number: 0702-ALSK.

Needs and Uses: At the direction of the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army and the Assistant Secretary for Manpower & Reserve Affairs (ASA M&RA), the ARI for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is completing a longitudinal examination of performance, attitudes, and behaviors of Soldiers who select to come to Alaska as their first duty station at time of enlistment, also known as Option 20 Soldiers. The U.S. Army has initiated a variety of actions aimed at improving quality of life for Soldiers in Alaska in order to reduce rates of harmful behaviors and increase the ability for Soldiers to thrive. This survey collection will collect data from a sample of Army junior enlisted Soldiers in Alaska to investigate the impacts of living and working in Alaska on effectiveness, quality of life, cohesion, leadership, recruiting and retention. ARI is also investigating potential differences between Option 20 Soldiers and Non-Option 20 Soldiers.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 200.

Number of Respondents: 400.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 400.

Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

Frequency: Once.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Status of the Forces Survey of Reserve Members; OMB Control Number: 0704-0616.

Needs and Uses: The Status of Forces Reserve Survey (SOFS-R) is an annual DoD-wide large-scale survey of Reserve Component members that is used in evaluating existing policies and programs, establishing baseline measures before implementing new policies and programs, and monitoring the progress of existing policies/programs. The survey assesses topics such as financial well-being, retention intention, stress, tempo, readiness, satisfaction, and suicide awareness. Data is aggregated by appropriate demographics, including Service, paygrade, gender, race/ethnicity, and other indicators. In order to be able to meet reporting requirements for DoD leadership, the Military Services, and Congress, the survey needs to be completed in on annual basis. The legal requirements for the SOFS-R can be found in the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act, title VI, subtitle F, subpart 661. This legal requirement mandates that the SOFS-R solicit information on financial literacy and preparedness. Results will be used by the Service Secretaries to evaluate and update financial literacy training and will be submitted in a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Annual Burden Hours: 6,425.

Number of Respondents: 19,275.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 19,275.

Average Burden per Response: 20 minutes.

Frequency: Annually.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Defense Biometric Identification System (DBIDS) Registration Application; OMB Control Number: 0704-0455.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to obtain and record the biographic and biometric data connected with positively identifying identity, eligibility for access, and fitness within DBIDS and shared with Identity Matching Engine for Security and Analysts (IMESA)/Interoperability Layer Service (IoLS). The form data is used in the determination of access at DBIDS sites and affiliated systems through use of IMESA/IoLS.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 312,500.

Number of Respondents: 2,500,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 2,500,000.

Average Burden per Response: 7.5 minutes.

Frequency: On Occasion.

This meeting is being held under the provisions of chapter 10 of title 5 United States Code (U.S.C.) (formerly the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., App.)), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.50.

Purpose of the Meeting: In section 546 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2015 (FY 2015) (Pub. L. 113-291), as modified by section 537 of the NDAA FY 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92), Congress tasked the DAC-IPAD to advise the Secretary of Defense on the investigation, prosecution, and defense of allegations of rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct involving members of the Armed Forces. This will be the thirty-fourth public meeting held by the DAC-IPAD. On Day 1, the Committee will receive testimony from military justice practitioners local to installations near Colorado Springs, Colorado, on Military Rule of Evidence 513 litigation; Article 6b victims' rights litigation; judicial rulings on evidence in military sexual offense cases; and investigator access to digital evidence. On Day 2, the Committee will deliberate on the Day 1 panel sessions; will receive testimony from civilian practitioners on Service Member misconduct and comparative perspectives on evidentiary issues in civilian sexual assault trials; and will receive updates from the Policy Subcommittee, the Case Review Subcommittee, and the Special Projects Subcommittee. Prior to adjournment, the Committee will hear comments from the public.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: TRICARE Select Survey of Beneficiaries (TSS-B); OMB Control Number: 0720-TSSB.

Type of Request: New.

Number of Respondents: 5,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 5,000.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 1,250.

Needs and Uses: The TSS-B is a population-based survey, not a healthcare encounter-based survey; this makes it unique as the only survey of the entire TSS-B beneficiary population regardless of whether they have had a recent health care encounter. TSS-B is the sole source for Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Health Plan Survey of patient experience results for the TSS-B population. This information collection is used to evaluate and identify issues related to patient experience and access to care for TRICARE Select beneficiaries.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Matt Eliseo.

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: Lane Purvis.

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

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

Type of Request: New.

Number of Respondents: 63,600 (60,600 TRISS Adult; 3,000 TRISS Child).

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 63,600.

Average Burden per Response: 7 minutes for TRISS Adult; 15 minutes for TRISS Child.

Annual Burden Hours: 7,820.

Needs and Uses: The Defense Health Affairs administers the TRISS surveys (TRISS Adult and TRISS Child) to understand perceptions of inpatient care among Military Health System users. The survey instruments adhere 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. 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 Facility (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.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Matt Eliseo.

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: Lane Purvis.

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

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Prescription Drop Off/Activation Form; DHA Form 298; OMB Control Number: 0720-PDOA.

Type of Request: New.

Number of Respondents: 100,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 100,000.

Average Burden per Response: 3 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 5,000.

Needs and Uses: Defense Health Affairs (DHA) Form 298, Prescription Drop-Off/Activation, is a standardized form for prescription activation/drop-off across all military medical treatment facilities (MTFs). DHA Form 298 allows pharmacy patients the option to request the MTF pharmacy activate/process their prescriptions without having to wait in a line to speak with pharmacy staff. This may also include the ability to drop off the form outside of normal pharmacy hours. Copies of the form may be provided physically in the MTF, or it is possible that MTFs may provide it electronically for patient use to complete/print at their convenience. The MTF pharmacy uses the information provided in the form to process the requested prescriptions for the patients to pick up later.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Matt Eliseo.

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: Mr. Lane Purvis.

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

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Status of the Forces Survey of Active Duty Members; OMB Control Number: 0704-0624.

Needs and Uses: The Status of Forces Active Duty Survey (SOFS-A) is an annual DoD-wide large-scale survey of Active Duty members that is used in evaluating existing policies and programs, establishing baseline measures before implementing new policies and programs, and monitoring the progress of existing policies/programs. The survey assesses topics such as financial well-being, retention intention, stress, tempo, readiness, and suicide awareness. Data is aggregated by appropriate demographics, including Service, paygrade, gender, race/ethnicity, and other indicators. In order to be able to meet reporting requirements for DoD leadership, the Military Services, and Congress, the survey needs to be completed in 2024. The legal requirements for the SOFS-A can be found in the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act, title VI, subtitle F, subpart 661. This legal requirement mandates that the SOFS-A solicit information on financial literacy and preparedness. Results will be used by the Service Secretaries to evaluate and update financial literacy training and will be submitted in a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Annual Burden Hours: 5,775.

Number of Respondents: 17,325.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 17,325.

Average Burden per Response: 20 minutes.

Frequency: Annually.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: The Health Care Survey of DoD Beneficiaries; OMB Control Number: 0720-HCSD.

Type of Request: New.

Number of Respondents: 24,200.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 24,200.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 6,050.

Needs and Uses: Legal authority for this information collection is found in the 1993 National Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. 102-484). The Health Care Survey of DoD Beneficiaries (HCSDB) is the only population-based Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Health Plan Survey (v5.0) administered to a statistically representative, world-wide sample of all eligible DoD beneficiaries by the Defense Health Agency (DHA). The instrument includes an additional module that is the only population-based measurement of Healthy People 2030 goals and health metrics reflecting the priorities of senior health leaders. The HCSDB is a population-based survey, not a healthcare encounter-based survey. As such, the HCSDB is the only survey able to measure access to care and other metrics for beneficiaries who may not be using the TRICARE health system due to barriers to care they encounter. This information collection, which began in 2008, continues to be of critical importance to DHA and Congress in assessing Military Health System and Managed Care Support Contractor performance by allowing for trending by various beneficiary categories over time.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Matt Eliseo.

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: Mr. Lane Purvis.

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

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Military Members; OMB Control Number: 0704-0615.

Needs and Uses: The legal requirements for the Workplace and Gender Relations (WGR) surveys of military families can be found in the following:

Sexual assault, sexual harassment, and gender discrimination remain a major concern across the DoD and for members of Congress. In February 2004, the USD(P&R) testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the prevalence of sexual assault in the DoD and the programs and policies planned to address the issues. In accordance with legislative requirements, the USD(P&R) issued memoranda to the Services that provides DoD policy guidance on sexual assault that included a new standard definition, response capability, training requirements, response actions, and reporting guidance throughout the Department. The Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office supported implementation of the new policy and requires data to assess the prevalence of sexual assault in the Department and the effectiveness of the programs they have implemented.

The WGR surveys assess the attitudes and opinions of military members on issues relating to sexual harassment, gender discrimination, sexual assault, as well as the culture and climate of the units/organizations in which individuals serve. The surveys provide the policy offices of the USD(P&R) with current data on (1) the positive and negative trends for professional and personal relationships between Service members; (2) the specific types of assault that have occurred and the number of times in the preceding year; (3) the effectiveness of DoD policies designed to improve professional relationships between male and female Service members; (4) the effectiveness of current processes for complaints, reports, and investigations; and, (5) specific issues related to sexual harassment, sexual assault, and gender discrimination that may inform the Department's prevention and response efforts.

Affected Public: Individuals and households.

Annual Burden Hours: 102,150.

Number of Respondents: 204,300.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 204,300.

Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

Frequency: Biennially.

The target population for the WGR includes active duty members serving in the Active component from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard as well as Reserve component members in the Selected Reserve (in Reserve Units, Active Guard/Reserve (AGR/FTS/AR Title 10 and Title 32), and Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) programs) from the Army National Guard, U.S. Army Reserve, U.S. Navy Reserve, U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, Air National Guard, U.S. Air Force Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve. The Office of People Analytics (OPA) will administer the WGR survey via the web. The survey is administered via proprietary software developed by OPA's operations contractor. To reduce respondent burden, web-based surveys use “smart skip” technology to ensure respondents only answer questions that are applicable to them.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Grow Safe and Secure Feasibility Evaluation; OMB Control Number: 0704-GSFE.

Needs and Uses: Grow Safe and Secure (GSS) is a DoD co-developed, evidence-informed parent-education program designed to be delivered to parents/caregivers by trained clinicians in an individual format over a minimum of six sessions. This project is needed to understand the implementation feasibility of using the GSS program with parents/caregivers of elementary school-aged children (5 to 10 years old) who are experiencing or may be at risk of child maltreatment. The Department of Defense, Service branches, and the Family Advocacy Program need to gain an understanding of: (a) the program's processes and (b) clinicians', parents', and caregivers' perceptions of the program.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Annual Burden Hours: 85.3 hours.

Number of Respondents: 341.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 341.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Frequency: Once.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) administers the National Wetland Plant List (NWPL) for the United States (U.S.) and its territories. Responsibility for the NWPL was transferred to the USACE from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in 2006. The NWPL has undergone several revisions since its inception in 1988. Additions or deletions to the NWPL represent new records, range extensions, nomenclatural and taxonomic changes, and newly proposed species. The latest review process began in 2022 and included review by Regional Panels (RPs), the National Panel (NP), and the public, who provided input on proposed wetland rating changes for two species submitted by the public. Both of the species were submitted for a rating change request in the Arid West region. The proposed indicator changes were announced in a Federal Register Notice, 88 FR 3729, January 20, 2023, with the comment period ending on March 21, 2023. One comment was received during that time.

On the NWPL, five categories of wetland indicator status ratings are used to indicate a plant's likelihood for occurrence in wetlands versus non-wetlands: Obligate Wetland (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), Facultative (FAC), Facultative Upland (FACU), and Upland (UPL). These rating categories are defined by the NP as follows: OBL—almost always occur in wetlands; FACW—usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands; FAC—occur in wetlands and non-wetlands; FACU—usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands; and UPL—almost always occur in non-wetlands. These category definitions are qualitative descriptions that better reflect the qualitative supporting information, rather than numeric frequency ranges. The percentage frequency categories used in the older definitions are only used for testing problematic or contested species being recommended for indicator status changes. Plus and minus designations and wetland indicator designations such as No Indicator (NI), No Occurrence (NO), and No Agreement (NA) were removed in 2012 and are no longer used on the NWPL. More information on the specifics of how to use these ratings is available on the NWPL website at https://wetland-plants.sec.usace.army.mil/.

The NWPL is utilized in conducting wetland delineations under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq. ) and wetland determinations under the authority of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq. ). For the purposes of determining how often a species occurs in wetlands, wetlands are defined as either (1) those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (33 CFR 328.3) or (2) “except when such term is part of the term `converted wetland,' means land that has a predominance of hydric soils; is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions; and under normal circumstances does support a prevalence of such vegetation.” (16 U.S.C. 3801(a)(27) and 7 CFR 12.2). Wetlands are identified using the three-factor approach. Because each species being evaluated occurs as part of a vegetation assemblage, examining the other species present in relation to their assigned wetland fidelity may be useful in assessing hydrophytic vegetation.

For the 2022 NWPL update, the NWPL NP and Arid West RP reviewed proposed wetland rating changes for two species submitted by the public. Both species were submitted for a rating change request in the Arid West region. As noted in the Federal Register Notice, 88 FR 3729, January 20, 2023, the 2022 NWPL update will include a nomenclature change for Populus fremontii in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement signed in 2017 (2017 MOA). 1 Because the nomenclature change is required by the 2017 MOA, the USACE requested public input on the proposed rating change for Populus fremontii only and not the nomenclature change itself. Submitted information was reviewed by the NP and the Arid West RP, and proposed 2022 ratings for these species were determined. Along with soliciting information on the species being evaluated, we also solicited comments on the overall NWPL process, in particular whether the NWPL update cycle should remain the present two years or be changed to a three-year update cycle. This information was detailed in the Federal Register Notice, 88 FR 3729, January 20, 2023, and the information on the proposed wetland rating changes is summarized in the table below.

In response to the initial Federal Register notice, the USACE received only one comment which addressed the two- versus three-year NWPL update cycle. This comment was in favor of retaining the two-year update cycle. Based on this comment, this broader review, and other factors including the 2017 MOA, the existing two-year update cycle for the NWPL will be retained.

The public may provide input to be considered as part of future NWPL updates by utilizing the following procedures. A change in indicator status or addition of a currently unlisted species may be requested at any time at https://wetland-plants.sec.usace.army.mil/ by clicking on the “Submit a NWPL Change Request” link and submitting the appropriate data. Appropriate data includes ecological data, literature reviews, frequency and abundance data, testing descriptions, and geographic data for the taxon in wetlands and non-wetlands in the USACE wetland region or subregion for which the change is proposed.

In accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement signed in 2006 (2006 MOA), 2 the USACE, endorsed by the EPA, FWS and NRCS, is publishing final wetland indicator statuses for the 2022 NWPL. The final NWPL is available at https://wetland-plants.sec.usace.army.mil/. State, regional, and national lists can also be downloaded from this site. The list will be used in any wetland delineations performed after the effective date. Delineations completed prior to the effective date may still use the 2020 NWPL. Completed wetland delineation/determination forms should reference the version of the NWPL used to complete the form. This completes the review of the NWPL. All comments received have been evaluated and final indicator statuses have been set.

Detailed information on the update process, protocol, and technical issues can be found in the following documents (available on the NWPL Publications web page):

• Lichvar, Robert W. and Paul Minkin. Concepts and Procedures for Updating the National Wetland Plant List. Sept 2008. ERDC/CRREL TN-08-3. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

• Lichvar, Robert W. and Jennifer J. Gillrich. Final Protocol for Assigning Wetland Indicator Status Ratings during National Wetland Plant List Update. Sept 2011. ERDC/CRREL TN-11-1. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

Additional cited literature:

Lichvar R.W., N.C. Melvin, M.L. Butterwick, and W.N. Kirchner. 2012. National Wetland Plant List Indicator Rating Definitions. ERDC/CRREL TN-12-1. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

A decision document has been prepared for this action after all comments received were evaluated. The decision document is available through Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Operations and Regulatory Community of Practice, 441 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20314-1000.

The NWPL is utilized in conducting wetland delineations under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq. ) and wetland determinations under the authority of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq. ). The Corps has responsibility for issuing this update pursuant to the 2006 MOA.

The Charter of the NEYAC (available at https://www.epa.gov/faca/national-environmental-youth-advisory-council-neyac ) states that the advisory council will provide independent advice and recommendations to the Administrator of EPA on how to increase the agency's efforts to address a range of environmental issues as they relate to youth, with an emphasis on youth below 29 years of age. The NEYAC will provide a critical perspective on how the impacts of climate change and other environmental harms affects youth.

Individual registration is required for the public meeting. No two individuals can share the same registration link. Information on how to register is located at https://www.epa.gov/faca/national-environmental-youth-advisory-council-neyac. Registration for the meeting is available until the scheduled end time of the meeting. Registration to speak during the public comment period will close at 11:59 p.m., ET, on Wednesday, February 21, 2024. When registering, please provide your name, organization, city and state, and email address for follow up. Please also indicate whether you would like to provide public comment during the meeting, or if you are submitting written comments.

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-2024-0043, at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section. Comments must be submitted by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 14, 2024. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA's docket at https://www.regulations.gov any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission ( i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). Please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets for additional submission methods; the full EPA public comment policy; information about CBI, PBI, or multimedia submissions; and general guidance on making effective comments.

EPA will begin pre-registering speakers for the public meeting upon publication of this document in the Federal Register . To register to speak virtually or in-person, please use the online registration form available at https://www.epa.gov/faca/national-environmental-youth-advisory-council-neyac. The last day to pre-register to speak at the public meeting will be at 11:59 p.m., ET, on Wednesday, February 21, 2024.

EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the public meeting; however, please plan for the meeting to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.

Individuals or groups making remarks during the public comment period will be limited to two (2)-three (3) minutes. Please be prepared to briefly describe your issue and your recommendation relevant to the current charges, topics, and questions under consideration by the NEYAC. EPA also recommends submitting the text of your oral comments as written comments to the rulemaking docket.

Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as oral comments and supporting information presented at the public meeting.

Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the public meeting are posted online at https://www.epa.gov/faca/national-environmental-youth-advisory-council-neyac. While EPA expects the public meeting to go forward as set forth above, please monitor our website. EPA does not intend to publish a document in the Federal Register announcing updates.

To request special accommodations for a disability or other assistance, please submit your request at least five (5) working days prior to the meeting to give EPA sufficient time to process your request. All requests should be sent to the email listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0645.

Title: Sections 17.4, 17.48 and 17.49, Antenna Structure Registration Requirements.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, not-for-profit institutions and state, local or tribal government.

Number of Respondents: 16,300 respondents; 70,543 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .1-.25 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement, recordkeeping requirement and third-party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in Sections 4, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303.

Total Annual Burden: 10,326 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $56,230.

Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an extension of this information collection in order to obtain the full three-year approval. The Commission has adjusted its burden and cost estimates in order to update the collection burdens necessary to implement a uniform registration process as well as safe and effective lighting procedures for owners of antenna structures.

Section 17.4 includes third party disclosure requirements. Specifically, Section 17.4 requires the owner of any proposed or existing antenna structure that requires notice of proposed construction to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to register the structure with the Commission. This includes those structures used as part of the stations licensed by the Commission for the transmission of radio energy, or to be used as part of a cable television head-end system. An antenna structure must be registered with the Commission if the antenna structure is taller than 200 feet above ground level or may interfere with the flight path of a nearby airport or heliport. Section 17.4(f) provides that antenna structure owners shall immediately provide to all tenant licensees and permittees notification that the structure has been registered. This may be done by providing either a copy of Form 854 or a link to the FCC antenna structure registration website. This notification may be done electronically or via paper mail.

Section 17.4(g) requires antenna structure owners to display the Antenna Structure Registration Number in a conspicuous place that is readily visible near the base of the antenna. This rule specifically requires that the Antenna Structure Number be displayed so that it is conspicuously visible and legible from the publicly accessible area nearest the base of the antenna structure along the publicly accessible roadway or path. Where an antenna structure is surrounded by a perimeter fence, or where the point of access includes an access gate, the Antenna Structure Registration Number should be posted on the perimeter fence or access gate. Where multiple antenna structures having separate Antenna Structure Registration Numbers are located within a single fenced area, the Antenna Structure Registration Numbers must be posted both on the perimeter fence or access gate and near the base of each antenna structure. If the base of the antenna structure has more than one point of access, the rule requires that the Antenna Structure Registration Number be posted so that it is visible at the publicly accessible area nearest each such point of access. The registration number is issued to identify antenna structure owners in order to enforce the Congressionally mandated provisions related to the owners.

Sections 17.48 and 17.49 contain reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Section 17.48(a) requires that antenna structure owners immediately report outages of top steady burning lights or flashing antenna structure lights to the FAA, if not corrected within 30 minutes. Upon receipt of the outage notification, the FAA will issue a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), which notifies aircraft of the outage. Consistent with FAA requirements, if a lighting outage cannot be repaired within the FAA's original NOTAM period, Section 17.48(a) further requires the antenna structure owner to notify the FAA of that fact and provide any needed updates to its estimated return-to-service date. The rule also requires antenna structure owners to continue to provide these updates to the FAA every NOTAM period until its lights are repaired.

Section 17.49 requires antenna structure owners to maintain a record of observed or otherwise known extinguishments or improper functioning of structure lights for two years and provide the records to the Commission upon request.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1287.

Title: Secure Telephone Identity Governance Authority Token Revocation Review Process.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently-approved information collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 50 respondents; 50 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 24 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Mandatory and required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 227b, 251(e), and 227(e) of the Communications Act of 1934.

Total Annual Burden: 1,200 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: On December 30, 2019, Congress enacted the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act. The TRACED Act directed the Commission to require, no later than 18 months from enactment, all service providers to implement the STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication framework in the internet protocol (IP) portions of their networks and implement an effective caller ID authentication framework in the non-IP portions of their networks. To implement the TRACED Act's provisions related to caller ID authentication, the Commission adopted a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on March 30, 2020, which required service providers to implement the STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication technology in the IP portions of their phone networks by June 30, 2021. The Commission then adopted a Second Report and Order on September 29, 2020 to further implement the remaining portions of the TRACED Act related to caller ID authentication and STIR/SHAKEN.

On August 5, 2021, the Commission adopted a Third Report and Order, which established a limited role for the Commission to oversee certificate revocation decisions by the private STIR/SHAKEN governance system that would have the effect of placing providers in noncompliance with the Commission's rules. Within the STIR/SHAKEN framework, service providers share a digital certificate along with each call as a means of maintaining trust and accountability. The STIR/SHAKEN governance system can revoke a service provider's access to these digital certificates due to that service provider's violation of a specified list of rules and policies. Because this revocation would place an affected service provider in noncompliance with the Commission's rules, the Third Report and Order established an oversight role for the Commission over the governance system's token revocation decisions similar to the one the Commission holds in the context of decisions by the Universal Service Administrative Company. The rules allow for review by the Wireline Competition Bureau in the first instance.

Under the rules adopted in the Third Report and Order, a request for Commission review from a service provider, at a minimum, must contain: (1) a statement setting forth the service provider's asserted basis for appealing the governance system's revocation decision; (2) a full statement of relevant, material facts with supporting affidavits and documentation, including any background information the service provider deems useful to the Commission's review; and (3) the question presented for review, with reference, where appropriate, to any underlying Commission rule or STIR/SHAKEN governance system policy.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1189.

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

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

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

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

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

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

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

Total Annual Burden: 324,465 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

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

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

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

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

Section 20.21(h)—By March 1, 2014, all providers who voluntarily consent to *19619 the use of Consumer Signal Boosters on their networks must establish a free registration system for their subscribers. At a minimum, providers must collect (1) the name of the Consumer Signal Booster owner and/or operator, if different individuals; (2) the make, model, and serial number of the device; (3) the location of the device; and (4) the date of initial operation. Otherwise, the Commission permits providers to develop their own registration systems to facilitate provider control and interference resolution, providers should collect only such information that is reasonably related to achieving these dual goals. Wireless providers may determine how to collect such information and how to keep it up-to-date. Section 90.219(d)(5)—This rule requires operators of Part 90 Class B signal boosters to register these devices in a searchable on-line database that will be maintained and operated by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau via delegated authority from the Commission. The Commission believes this will be a valuable tool to resolve interference should it occur.

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

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

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

The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1126.

Title: Testing and Logging Requirements for Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA).

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 76 respondents, 429,020 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 3.375 hours.

Frequency of Response: Monthly and on occasion reporting and record keeping requirements.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 301, 303, 307, 309, 316, 403, 554, 606, 1201, 1202, 1203, 1204, and 1206 of the Communications Act of 1934.

Total Annual Burden: 119,121 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No Cost.

Needs and Uses: The Commission adopted requirements for Participating CMS Providers to log the basic attributes of alerts they receive at their Alert Gateway, to maintain those logs for at least 12 months, to make those logs available upon request to the Commission and FEMA, and to emergency management agencies that offer confidentiality protection at least equal to that provided by federal FOIA. The Commission also requires Participating CMS Providers to disclose information regarding their capabilities for geo-targeting Alert Messages initiated by that emergency management agency, and information regarding the results of WEA Performance and Public Awareness Testing. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements have potential to increase emergency managers' confidence that WEA will work as intended when needed. This increased confidence in system availability encourages emergency management agencies that do not currently use WEA to become authorized. These reporting and recordkeeping requirements also help to ensure a fundamental component of system integrity against which future iterations of WEA can be evaluated. Without records that can be used to describe the quality of system integrity, and the most common causes of message transmission failure it would be difficult to evaluate how any changes to WEA may effect system integrity.

Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of 30 days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained at https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/commission-actions.

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before March 14, 2024. Write “Blackbaud, Inc.; File No. 202 3181,” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.

Because of heightened security screening, postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay. We strongly encourage you to submit your comments online through the https://www.regulations.gov website. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Blackbaud, Inc.; File No. 202 3181” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Drop H-144 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580.

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

Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule § 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule § 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the https://www.regulations.gov website—as legally required by FTC Rule § 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from that website, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule § 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

Visit the FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to read this document and the news release describing the proposed settlement. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments it receives on or before March 14, 2024. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

The Federal Trade Commission (the “Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing consent order from Blackbaud, Inc. (“Respondent” or “Blackbaud”). The proposed consent order (“Proposed Order”) has been placed on the public record for 30 days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will again review the agreement, along with any comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement and take appropriate action or make final the Proposed Order.

Blackbaud is a publicly traded South Carolina corporation that provides a variety of data services and financial, fundraising, and administrative software solutions to over 45,000 companies, nonprofits, foundations, educational institutions, healthcare organizations, and individual customers throughout the U.S. and abroad. Blackbaud maintains the personal information of millions of U.S. consumers that have donor, student, patient, and other relationships with Blackbaud's customers.

According to the FTC's Complaint, despite representing that it would protect consumers' data from unauthorized access through a variety of safeguards, from February through May 2020, Blackbaud's networks suffered a data breach from an attacker that exfiltrated data from thousands of Blackbaud customers. This data comprised millions of consumers' personal information, including, in some cases, sensitive information including social security numbers and financial information. Adding to the scope and severity of the breach was Blackbaud's indefinite retention of customer backup files, which impacted additional current, prospective, and former customers, whose consumer data would not have otherwise been impacted by the data breach. And when Blackbaud informed customers of the breach in July 2020, its initial breach notification statement inaccurately stated that the hacker had not stolen sensitive consumer data. Blackbaud did not correct this information until October 2020, despite knowing it was inaccurate only a couple of weeks after the initial breach notification.

The Commission's proposed five-count complaint alleges that Respondent violated section 5(a) of the FTC Act by (1) failing to employ reasonable information security practices to protect consumers' personal information; (2) failing to implement and enforce reasonable data retention practices; (3) failing to accurately communicate about the breach in its initial breach notification; (4) misrepresenting that it used appropriate safeguards to protect consumers' personal information; and (5) misrepresenting the scope of the breach by stating that consumers' personal information had not been impacted by the breach in its initial notification. With respect to the first count, the proposed complaint alleges that Respondent:

• failed to implement appropriate password controls, which resulted in employees often using default, weak or identical passwords;

• failed to apply adequate multifactor authentication for both employees and customers to protect sensitive consumer information;

• failed to prevent data theft by (1) monitoring for unauthorized attempts to transfer or exfiltrate consumers' personal information from its networks; (2) continuously logging and monitoring its systems and assets to identify data security events; and (3) performing regular assessments as to the effectiveness of protection measures;

• failed to implement and enforce appropriate data retention schedules and deletion practices for the vast amounts of consumers' personal information stored on its network;

• failed to patch outdated software and systems in a timely manner;

• failed to test, audit, assess or review its products' or applications' security features; and conduct regular risk assessments, vulnerability scans, and penetration testing of its networks and databases;

• failed to implement appropriate firewall controls; and

• failed to implement appropriate network segmentation to prevent attackers from moving freely across its networks and databases.

The proposed complaint alleges that Respondent could have addressed each of these failures by implementing readily available and relatively low-cost security measures. With respect to the second count, the proposed complaint alleges that Respondent failed to implement and enforce reasonable data retention practices for sensitive consumer data maintained by its customers on its network. With respect to the third count, the proposed complaint alleges that Respondent failed to accurately communicate the scope and severity of the breach in its initial notification to consumers.

The proposed complaint alleges that, with respect to counts one, two, and three, Respondent's failures caused, or are likely to cause, substantial injury to consumers that is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition and is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves. Such practices constitute unfair acts or practices under section 5 of the FTC Act.

With respect the fourth count, the proposed complaint alleges that, at various times, Respondent claimed that is used appropriate safeguards to protect consumers' personal information. The proposed complaint alleges that, in reality, and as noted above, Respondent failed to implement reasonable measures to protect consumer's personal information. Such representations were deceptive under section 5 of the FTC Act.

With respect to the fifth count, the proposed complaint alleges that, in its initial breach notification, Respondent claimed that consumers' personal information had not been subject to the breach. The proposed complaint alleges that, in reality, and as noted above, consumers' personal information had been exfiltrated by the attacker in the breach. Such representations were, therefore, deceptive under section 5 of the FTC Act.

The Proposed Order contains injunctive relief designed to prevent Respondent from engaging in the same or similar acts or practices in the future. Part I prohibits Respondent from misrepresenting the extent (1) to which it maintains, uses, deletes or disclosed consumers' personal information; (2) to which it protects the privacy, security, availability, confidentiality, or integrity of consumers' personal information; or (3) of any future data security incident or unauthorized disclosure of consumers' personal information.

Part II requires Respondent to delete or destroy customer backup files containing consumers' personal information that are not being retained to provide its products or services and to refrain from maintaining consumers' personal information that is not necessary for the purposes for which it is maintained by Respondent. Part III requires that Respondent document and adhere to a retention schedule for its customer backup files containing consumers' personal information, including the purposes for which it maintains such information, the business needs for its retention, and the timeframe for its deletion.

Part IV requires that Respondent establish and implement, and thereafter maintain, a comprehensive information security program that protects the security, availability, confidentiality, and integrity of consumers' personal information. Part V requires Respondent to obtain initial and biennial information security assessments by an independent, third-party professional for 20 years. Part VI requires Respondent to disclose all material facts to the assessor required by Part V and prohibits Respondent from misrepresenting any fact material to the assessments required by Part IV.

Part VII requires Respondent to submit an annual certification from its Chief Information Security Officer that the company has implemented the requirements of the Order and is not aware of any material noncompliance that has not been corrected or disclosed to the Commission. Part VIII requires Respondent to notify the Commission any time it notifies a federal, state, or local government that consumer personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, accessed, acquired, or publicly exposed without authorization.

Parts IX-XII are reporting and compliance provisions, which include recordkeeping requirements and provisions requiring Respondent to provide information or documents necessary for the Commission to monitor compliance. Part XIII states that the Proposed Order will remain in effect for 20 years, with certain exceptions.

The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the Proposed Order, and it is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the complaint or Proposed Order, or to modify the Proposed Order's terms in any way.

Today the FTC brings an enforcement action against Blackbaud for a series of unfair and deceptive data security practices. Blackbaud provides backend services for a variety of entities, ranging from businesses and nonprofits to schools and healthcare organizations. As noted in the FTC's complaint, Blackbaud in 2020 was struck by a data breach that exposed the personal data of millions of Americans. The FTC charges that Blackbaud's reckless data retention practices rendered its security failures much more costly: by hoarding reams of data that it did not reasonably need, Blackbaud's breach exposed far more data. Moreover, Blackbaud's notification alerting victims of the breach included false statements, which Blackbaud did not correct until months later—and months after it knew the statements were false.

The FTC's complaint alleges that Blackbaud's practices violated Section 5's prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices. The complaint marks a new step forward by alleging standalone unfairness counts for (a) failure to implement and enforce reasonable data retention practices (Count II) and (b) failure to accurately communicate the scope and severity of the breach in its notification to consumers (Count III). 1 Blackbaud's data retention failures exacerbated the harms of its data security failures because Blackbaud had failed to delete data it no longer needed. This action illustrates how indefinite retention of consumer data, which can lure hackers and magnify the harms stemming from a breach, is independently a prohibited unfair practice under the FTC Act. Similarly, Blackbaud's failure to accurately convey the scope and severity of the breach kept victims in the dark and delayed them from taking protective actions, making a bad situation even worse.

Today's action builds on a series of cases that have made clear that maintaining a data retention and deletion schedule is a critical part of protecting consumers' data security. 2 The Commission has also made clear that efforts to downplay the extent or severity of a data breach run afoul of the law. 3

We are grateful to the Division of Privacy and Identity Protection for their excellent work, which enables us to continue making key strides in protecting people's data. As businesses face fresh incentives to hoard data to train AI models, 4 protecting Americans from unlawful data practices will be especially critical.

The Notice of availability published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2024. GSA plans to publish at a later date.

Description: On an annual basis, states and territories are required to submit the following reports: (1) An Intended Use Plan that provides data and narrative descriptions related to the state's SSBG program. The Intended Use Plan includes details about the delivery of SSBG services and the state agency administering the SSBG Program. ACF is proposing to expand the currently approved information collection to include the collection of states' Intended Use Plans with a model format. Recipients are required to submit their Pre-Expenditure Report no less than 30 days prior to the start of the period covered by the report. (2) A Pre-Expenditure Report demonstrates the state's anticipated allocation of SSBG funding among the 29 pre-defined SSBG service categories. Historically, states have submitted this report using the Post-Expenditure Report Form, and the associated burden is included in the currently approved information collection. Recipients are required to submit their Intended Use Plan no less than 30 days prior to the start of the period covered by the report, together with the Pre-Expenditure Report. (3) A Post-Expenditure Report details the state's actual use of SSBG funding among each of the 29 service categories. Recipients are required to submit their Post-Expenditure Report within 6 months of the end of the period covered by the report.

The law governing the programs at Title XX of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 1397c] mandates states and territories submit to the federal administering office an Intended Use Plan and Pre-Expenditure report. These materials are to detail the planned use of funds. At the end of the fiscal year, the law also requires states to provide the federal agency with a reconciliation of the actual use of grant funds in the Post-Expenditure Report [42 U.S.C. 1397e].

The forms and model plans support the states and territories in meeting the statutory requirement and provide a consistent set of tools for information collection on the grants' use for each state, as well as grant wide. The state and territory reports are congregated and analyzed and, in turn, comprise the SSBG Annual Report. The data informs the program's performance and efficiency measures for program impact and efficacy. OCS is proposing to make minor editorial modifications to some column titles in the Pre- and Post-Expenditure Reports, for clarification.

Respondents: Agencies that administer the SSBG at the state or territory level, including the 50 states; the District of Columbia; the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; Massachusetts Commission for the Blind (M-CFB); and the territories of American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1397-1397e.

I. Background

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Use of Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials.” This guidance pertains primarily to the sponsor's responsibility for clinical trial management and decision making, but may also be relevant to any individual or group to whom the sponsor has delegated applicable trial management responsibilities. This guidance provides recommendations to help sponsors of clinical trials determine: (1) when a DMC (also known as a DSMB, a DSMC, or an IDMC) would be useful for trial monitoring and (2) what procedures and practices should be considered to guide their operation. Under FDA regulations, sponsors are not required to use DMCs in clinical trials except under 21 CFR 50.24(a)(7)(iv), where an institutional review board can approve a clinical trial without requiring informed consent from all research subjects, provided certain requirements are met, including the establishment of an independent DMC.

Although the use of DMCs initially was more common in disease areas associated with significant morbidity or mortality, since 2006, there has been an increase in the use of DMCs in many disease areas not involving serious morbidity or mortality. For example, DMCs can provide the specialized expertise to evaluate emerging efficacy and safety data for trials in rare diseases ( e.g., certain genetic disorders), for trials in vulnerable populations ( e.g., neonates), and for oncologic therapies with highly specific targets and potential serious risks ( e.g., biological products for genetic targets, immunotherapies). DMCs are also being used in early phase trials in serious diseases or conditions. With this growth of DMC use, a variety of approaches to DMC operations has been developed.

This draft guidance revises the guidance for clinical trial sponsors entitled “Establishment and Operation of Clinical Trial Data Monitoring Committees” issued on March 28, 2006. Changes to the guidance reflect changes in DMC structure and practice since FDA issued the 2006 version. When finalized, this guidance will replace the 2006 guidance.

Sponsors may be required to monitor clinical studies evaluating investigational drugs, biological products, and devices (see 21 CFR 312.50 and 312.56 (for drugs and biological products) and 21 CFR 812.2(b)(1)(iv), 812.40, and 812.46 (for devices)). Various groups and/or individuals play different roles in clinical trial monitoring and oversight. One such group is a DMC. A clinical trial DMC is established by a sponsor and is composed of a group of individuals with relevant expertise that reviews accumulating data on a regular basis from one or more clinical trials and recommends to the sponsor whether to continue, modify, or stop a trial or trials.

Consistent with § 312.32(d)(1) (21 CFR 312.32(d)(1)), the sponsor must investigate a DMC's recommendation relating to an increased rate of serious unanticipated adverse events as potentially reportable to FDA under § 312.32. If the sponsor concludes that there is a “reasonable possibility” that the increased rate of serious unanticipated adverse events was associated with use of the drug, the finding, and support for it (which could include the DMC report, any analyses, and pertinent data) must be submitted to FDA as a serious unexpected suspected adverse reaction. Similar considerations would also apply if the sponsor concludes that an increased rate of adverse events constitutes an unanticipated adverse device effect under 21 CFR 812.46(b) and 812.150(b)(1).

In the guidance (section VI.B), FDA recommends that sponsors establish a charter describing DMC obligations, responsibilities, and standard operating procedures. The charter should address, for example, the following:

1. Procedures for assessing financial and intellectual conflicts of interest of proposed DMC members, including identifying any concurrent service of any DMC member on other DMCs for trials of the same, related, or competing product;

2. how unblinded analyses will be prepared ( e.g., by an independent statistician) for the DMC and at what frequency; and

3. procedures to maintain the confidentiality of interim comparative data in communications between the DMC, the sponsor, and (if applicable) outside parties to ensure that such data available to the DMC are not inappropriately disclosed or disclosed without appropriate protections.

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 “Use of Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials.” 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.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed revision of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

This collection of information supports recommendations found in the Agency guidance. The draft guidance document entitled “Use of Data Monitoring Committees in Clinical Trials” addresses the roles, responsibilities, and operating procedures of DMCs and describes certain reporting and recordkeeping responsibilities, including the following: (1) sponsor reporting to FDA on DMC recommendations related to safety; (2) standard operating procedures (SOPs) for DMCs; (3) DMC meeting records; and (4) DMC reports based on meeting minutes to the sponsor. The submission of the requested information provides the appropriate parties with essential information regarding the clinical trial upon which they may base their recommendations.

FDA recommends that sponsors inform FDA about all DMC recommendations related to the safety of the investigational product, whether or not the adverse events that led to the recommendation meet the definition of serious.

In section VI.B of the guidance, we outline recommendations for establishing a DMC charter describing SOPs. The SOPs ensure that established written procedures are followed and proper recordkeeping is performed.

In section VII of the guidance, we outline the relationships of the DMC members and the sponsors to address the independence of the DMC from the sponsor.

FDA recommends that the DMC keep minutes of all meetings but use separate minutes for open and closed sessions.

The Agency recommends in the guidance that DMCs should issue a written report to the sponsor based on the DMC meeting minutes. This report should include sufficient information to explain the rationale for any recommended changes. Sponsors should establish procedures to minimize bias, such as requiring that reports to the sponsor include only those data generally available to the sponsor ( e.g., number screened, number enrolled at each site) (see 21 CFR 314.126(b)(5) and 860.7(f)(1)). FDA may request copies of DMC meeting records when the trial is completed (21 CFR 312.58 and 812.150(b)(10)) and may also request access to the electronic data sets used for each set of interim analysis. FDA therefore recommends that sponsors arrange for archiving such electronic data sets.

Description of the Respondents: The submission and data collection recommendations described in this document affect sponsors of clinical trials and DMCs.

FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows: