Background: The Committee was established under the discretionary authority of the Secretary of Commerce and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app.). It provides advice to the Secretary of Commerce on the necessary elements of a comprehensive policy approach to supply chain competitiveness and on regulatory policies and programs and investment priorities that affect the competitiveness of U.S. supply chains. For more information about the Committee visit: https://www.trade.gov/acscc.

Matters to be Considered: Committee members are expected to continue discussing the major competitiveness-related topics raised at the previous Committee meetings, including supply chain resilience and congestion; trade and competitiveness; freight movement and policy; trade innovation; regulatory issues; finance and infrastructure; and workforce development. The Committee's subcommittees will report on the status of their work regarding these topics. The agenda may change to accommodate other Committee business. The Office of Supply Chain Services will post the final detailed agenda on its website, https://www.trade.gov/acscc. The video with closed captioning of the meeting will also be posted on the Committee website.

The meeting is open to the public and press on a first-come, first-served basis. Space is limited. Please contact Richard Boll, Designated Federal Officer, at richard.boll@trade.gov, for participation information.

On August 26, 2020, Commerce published in the Federal Register the AD order on wind towers from Indonesia. 1 On August 2, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the AD order. 2 On August 31, 2023, the Wind Tower Trade Coalition (the petitioner) submitted a timely request that Commerce conduct an administrative review. 3

On October 18, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of administrative review with respect to imports of wind towers from Indonesia in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i). 4 This review covers eight exporters and/or producers. 5 On October 18, 2023, we placed on the record U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for entries of wind towers from Indonesia during the POR, showing no reviewable POR entries and invited interested parties to comment. 6

On November 6, 2023, PT. Kenertec Power Systems (Kenertec), an exporter subject to this review, submitted a no-shipment certification, indicating that it had no exports or sales of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. 7

On February 8, 2024, Commerce notified all interested parties of its intent to rescind the instant review because there were no reviewable, suspended entries of subject merchandise by any of the companies subject to this review during the POR and invited interested parties to comment. 8 We did not receive any comments.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), it is Commerce's practice to rescind an administrative review of an AD order when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended. 9 Normally, upon completion of an administrative review, the suspended entries are liquidated at the AD assessment rate calculated for the review period. 10 Therefore, for an administrative review to be conducted, there must be at least one reviewable, suspended entry that Commerce can instruct CBP to liquidate at the AD assessment rate calculated for the review period. 11 As noted above, there were no entries of subject merchandise for the companies subject to this review during the POR. Accordingly, in the absence of suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR, we are hereby rescinding this administrative review, in its entirety, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

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

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 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.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

The Committee was established by the NOAA Administrator as directed by section 12304 of the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act, part of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-11), and reauthorized under the Coordinated Ocean Observations and Research Act of 2020 (Pub. L. 116-271). The Committee advises the NOAA Administrator and the Interagency Ocean Observation Committee (IOOC) on matters related to the responsibilities and authorities set forth in section 12302 and section 12304 of the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009 and other appropriate matters as the Under Secretary may refer to the Committee for review and advice.

The Committee will provide advice on:

(a) administration, operation, management, and maintenance of the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System (the System);

(b) expansion and periodic modernization and upgrade of technology components of the System;

(c) identification of end-user communities, their needs for information provided by the System, and the System's effectiveness in disseminating information to end-user communities and to the general public; and

(d) additional priorities, including—

(1) a national surface current mapping network designed to improve fine scale sea surface mapping using high frequency radar technology and other emerging technologies to address national priorities, including Coast Guard search and rescue operation planning and harmful algal bloom forecasting and detection that—

(i) is comprised of existing high frequency radar and other sea surface current mapping infrastructure operated by national programs and regional coastal observing systems;

(ii) incorporates new high frequency radar assets or other fine scale sea surface mapping technology assets, and other assets needed to fill gaps in coverage on United States coastlines; and

(iii) follows a deployment plan that prioritizes closing gaps in high frequency radar infrastructure in the United States, starting with areas demonstrating significant sea surface current data needs, especially in areas where additional data will improve Coast Guard search and rescue models;

(2) fleet acquisition for unmanned maritime systems for deployment and data integration to fulfill the purposes of this subtitle;

(3) an integrative survey program for application of unmanned maritime systems to the real-time or near real-time collection and transmission of sea floor, water column, and sea surface data on biology, chemistry, geology, physics, and hydrography;

(4) remote sensing and data assimilation to develop new analytical methodologies to assimilate data from the System into hydrodynamic models;

(5) integrated, multi-State monitoring to assess sources, movement, and fate of sediments in coastal regions;

(6) a multi-region marine sound monitoring system to be—

(i) planned in consultation with the IOOC, NOAA, the Department of the Navy, and academic research institutions; and

(ii) developed, installed, and operated in coordination with NOAA, the Department of the Navy, and academic research institutions; and

(e) any other purpose identified by the Administrator or the Council.

The meeting will focus on: (1) IOOC Strategic Plan, (2) final recommendations from the Phase 2 workplan, and (3) updates on the spring public meeting. The latest version of the agenda will be posted at http://ioos.noaa.gov/community/u-s-ioos-advisory-committee/. The times and the agenda topics described here are subject to change.

The meeting will be open to public participation (check agenda on website to confirm time). The Committee expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted verbal or written statements. In general, each individual or group making a verbal presentation will be limited to a total time of three (3) minutes. Written comments should be received by the Designated Federal Official by March 11, 2024, to provide sufficient time for Committee review. Written comments received after March 11, 2024, will be distributed to the Committee, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting date. To submit written comments, please fill out the brief form at https://forms.gle/MwbP2NXJhaz7cbuV8 or email your comments and the organization/company affiliation you represent to Laura Gewain, Laura.Gewain@noaa.gov.

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Krisa Arzayus, Designated Federal Official by phone (240-533-9455) or email ( Krisa.Arzayus@noaa.gov ) or to Laura Gewain ( Laura.Gewain@noaa.gov ) by March 11, 2024.

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a three-step process including: (1) Data Workshop; (2) Assessment Process utilizing webinars; and (3) Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The product of the Assessment Process is a stock assessment report which describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment is independently peer reviewed at the Review Workshop. The product of the Review Workshop is a Summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include: data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and State and Federal agencies.

The items of discussion at the SEDAR 82 South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish Review Workshop are as follows: Participants will evaluate the data and assessment reports, as specified in the Terms of Reference, to determine if they are scientifically sound.

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

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

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

The meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (title 5 United States Code (U.S.C), appendix), the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), and title 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), sections 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

Purpose of the Meeting: The Board's mission is to provide broad policy guidance and review and develop research plans and projects in consonance with the needs of the coastal engineering field and the objectives of the U.S. Army Chief of Engineers. The objective of this meeting is to identify coastal research needs and address Environmental Justice and Non-Structural Solutions.

Agenda: Starting Tuesday morning March 19, 2024, at 8 a.m. the Board will be called to order and panel session one entitled, Norfolk District Coastal Processes & Challenges will begin. Presentations include: NAO Coastal Setting, Processes, Projects, and R&D Needs; Natural Based Solutions: Challenges in Norfolk Study Leveraging Miami Dade Back Bay NBS Pilot; NAO Virginia Beach Study; NAO City of Norfolk CSRM Project and R&D Needs; Overview of City of Hampton Coastal Resiliency Activities; and Sea Level Rise and Climate Resiliency at JBLE-Langley. The meeting will then adjourn for the day.

The Board will reconvene on March 20, 2024, with a panel discussion entitled “Coastal Research Needs and Plans” presentations include: Non-Cohesive Sediment Transport R&D Needs and Plans; Advancing muddy (cohesive) sediment management through observation and prediction; AI applications to sediment transport; National USACE Sediment Transport Needs in Coastal Planning, Engineering, and O&M; and Sediment transport research at USACE: How to motivate and focus a program. After Lunch the board will discuss ongoing initiatives, future actions, plans for the 100th BCER give final comments.

Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and subject to space availability, the meeting is open to the public both in-person and virtually. Because seating capacity is limited, advance registration is required. For registration requirements please see below. Persons desiring to participate in the meeting online or by phone are required to submit their name, organization, email, and telephone contact information to Ms. Tanita Warren at Tanita.S.Warren@usace.army.mil no later than Friday, March 8, 2024. Specific instructions for virtual meeting participation, will be provided by reply email.

Oral participation by the public is scheduled for 3:15 p.m. on Wednesday, March 20, 2024. For additional information about public access procedures, please contact Dr. Julie Dean Rosati, the Board's DFO, at the email address or telephone number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Registration: It is encouraged for individuals who wish to attend the meeting of the Board to register with the DFO by email, the preferred method of contact, no later than March 8, 2024, using the electronic mail contact information found in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The communication should include the registrant's full name, title, affiliation or employer, email address, and daytime phone number. If applicable, include written comments or statements with the registration email.

Written Comments and Statements: In accordance with section 10(a)(3) of the FACA and title 41 CFR 102-3.015(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the Board, in response to the stated agenda of the open meeting or in regard to the Board's mission in general. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Dr. Julie Dean Rosati, DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Each page of the comment or statement must include the author's name, title or affiliation, address, and daytime phone number. The DFO will review all submitted written comments or statements and provide them to members of the Board for their consideration. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the DFO at least five business days prior to the meeting to be considered by the Board. The DFO will review all timely submitted written comments or statements with the Board Chairperson and ensure the comments are provided to all members of the Board before the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the Board until its next meeting.

Verbal Comments: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140d, the Board is not obligated to allow a member of the public to speak or otherwise address the Board during the meeting. Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the Board meeting only at the time and in the manner described below. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least five business days in advance to the Board's DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The DFO will log each request, in the order received, and in consultation with the Board Chair, determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the Board's mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 30-minute period near the end of the meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment, and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described above, will be allotted no more than five minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO.

Full Text of Announcement

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities by providing TA, supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research.

Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d)).

Absolute Priority: For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.

This priority is:

The National Center on Rigorous Comprehensive Education for Students with Disabilities.

Background:

Students receiving special education and related services are general education students first and foremost. In the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA, Congress found that “[a]n effective educational system serving students with disabilities should maintain high academic achievement standards and clear performance goals for children with disabilities, consistent with the standards and expectations for all students in the educational system and provide for appropriate and effective strategies and methods to ensure that all children with disabilities have the opportunity to achieve those standards and goals.” 20 U.S.C. 1450(4)(A). “Raise the Bar: Lead the World is the U.S. Department of Education's call to action to transform P-12 education and unite around what truly works—based on decades of experience and research—to advance educational equity and excellence” ( www.ed.gov/raisethebar/ ), including for students with disabilities. Through the Raise the Bar initiative, the Department seeks to focus attention to “deliver a comprehensive and rigorous education for every student.” Currently, students with disabilities too frequently lack access to a rigorous comprehensive education and remain under-challenged to achieve and progress from grade to grade (Cole et al., 2023).

A cornerstone of special education under IDEA is a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). It is through high-quality person-centered  1 individualized education programs (IEPs) that local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools plan and deliver evidence-based instruction, supports, and services to students with disabilities to provide FAPE in the LRE. However, States, LEAs, and schools continue to face significant challenges with providing FAPE, including person-centered, rigorous, and specially designed instruction and service delivery. Recent research indicates that the majority of IEPs are incomplete and lack substantive sufficiency of the statement of present levels of performance, which is the crucial initial component of a person-centered IEP ( e.g., Hott et al., 2021; Lequia et al., 2023). Although LEA, school-level, and classroom-level programming directly influence student outcomes, school teams are often too overwhelmed to implement the many projects, priorities, curricula, frameworks, and initiatives they are tasked to do (Wong et al., 2017). Schools end up piecing together multiple competing and fragmented priorities, instructional materials, and programs (Kaufman et al., 2020).

Schools have supported students' academic recovery in post-COVID schooling through accelerated learning, compensatory education, mental health supports, trauma-informed practices, and other activities (Page et al., 2021), but study findings suggest that the pandemic worsened existing inequity (Kuhfeld et al., 2022). As a result, LEAs and schools often struggle to address the needs of students with disabilities. School personnel need strategies, resources, and supports to assist them in streamlining, braiding, blending, and integrating instructional materials, standards, initiatives, frameworks, priorities, and practices into comprehensive and rigorous programming, which can result in increased and improved access, opportunities, and outcomes for students with disabilities as a whole and among subpopulations ( e.g., disability category, age, grade, gender, race, ethnicity).

The current instructional environment is further challenged when novice and underqualified personnel provide instruction and services to students with disabilities, serve on IEP teams, and manage caseloads of students with disabilities (Garcia et al., 2019). The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) data show that 45 percent of public schools are operating without a full teaching staff ( https://ies.ed.gov/schoolsurvey/ ), with special education positions disproportionately vacant, and 52 percent report great difficulty in filling vacancies by teachers with the appropriate certification or license. Additionally, all school professionals, including special education and general education personnel, should have a strong understanding of their roles on school teams to develop rigorous IEPs and to implement instruction and service delivery consistent with students' IEPs (Lequia et al., 2023). Teams must work together to develop and implement rigorous and comprehensive educational programming that allows students with disabilities to meet person-centered, rigorous objectives across the school's curricular, co-curricular, and extracurricular offerings.

Taken together, these challenges indicate the local context remains both unique from LEA to LEA and crucial to the programming offered, the objectives identified, and the services and supports needed to overcome the challenges and meet the objectives. To assist in addressing them, this project will develop and disseminate models and resources and provide TA to school teams to support the development and implementation of a rigorous and comprehensive education, which will result in improved educational results and functional outcomes for students with disabilities.

Priority:

The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Center on Rigorous Comprehensive Education for Students with Disabilities (project). The project will assist public, private, charter, Tribal, and correctional school teams, including administration, general and special education, related services, families, the community, and, to the extent possible, students, to increase the number and quality of evidence-based  2 IEPs with person-centered, rigorous objectives, the implementation of which will support the progress of students with disabilities from grade to grade and preparation for postsecondary education, employment, and community living.

The project must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Support of school teams to achieve consistent implementation of person-centered specially designed instruction, related services, and accommodations consistent with the students' IEPs and through use of evidence-based and best instructional practices to allow students with disabilities to achieve person-centered, rigorous objectives;

(b) Development and use of models for streamlining, braiding, blending, and integrating instructional materials, standards, initiatives, frameworks, priorities, and practices into a cohesive school-wide program easing professional burden while simultaneously raising school team expectations of students with disabilities to achieve person-centered, rigorous objectives;

(c) Development and increased use of evidence-based strategies, resources, and supports that allow schools to provide rigorous educational programming to prepare students with disabilities for postsecondary education, employment, and community living; and

(d) Support of school teams to achieve improved equity of access, opportunities, achievement, attainment, and outcomes, including academic achievement and social, emotional, and behavioral development by students with disabilities as a whole group and among disaggregated groups.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Identify and address the challenges to forming and sustaining effective school teams that include administration, general and special education personnel, related services providers, families, the community, and students;

(2) Identify and address the challenges facing public, private, charter, Tribal, and correctional school teams in their substantive and procedural implementation of educational programming for children with disabilities; and

(3) Apply evidence-based strategies and best practices that will effectively address the nature and magnitude of the challenges, described in response to paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), within a variety of schools, LEAs, and community contexts.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of project services,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

(ii) Ensure that services and products meet the needs of the intended recipients of the project services;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) by which the proposed project will achieve the expected outcomes and that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;

(3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks: https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based practices (EBPs). To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research and practices on developing, implementing, evaluating, and improving rigorous comprehensive education for students with disabilities to progress grade to grade and be ready for postsecondary education, employment, and community living;

(ii) The current research and practices about adult learning principles and implementation science that will inform the proposed product development, training, and TA;

(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and practices in the development and delivery of its products and services; and

(iv) How the proposed project will transfer the pertinent resources and products developed by the PROGRESS Center ( www.promotingprogress.org ) and maintain the continuity of services to their TA recipients as part of the transition to a new award, as appropriate;

(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration, responsive to the users' changing capacity, to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base regarding—

(A) Defining and operationalizing high expectations for students with disabilities, and supporting the students, their families, and the professionals working with them to strive to meet the high expectations;

(B) Clarifying the appropriate use of EBPs by disaggregating the research evidence of effectiveness among diverse settings and populations, such as areas with low and high population densities, diverse levels of wealth and poverty, and underserved populations, such as populations of color, homeless, food insecure, migrant, and justice-involved populations;

(C) Clarifying roles and strengthening meaningful participation of administrators, general educators, special educators, related service providers, and others to set high expectations and person-centered, rigorous objectives;

(D) Building capacity of school teams to leverage expertise of all school and LEA personnel, families, students, and community members in providing instruction, supports, and services so that students with disabilities progress from grade to grade and are prepared for postsecondary education, employment, and community living;

(E) Building and sustaining community partnerships among schools, community-based programs, child and youth associations, and places of worship, among others, to establish, strengthen, and sustain rigorous comprehensive education within various community contexts; and

(F) Allocating resources effectively and efficiently, including personnel who are qualified to serve students with disabilities but are currently not in special education positions ( e.g., dual certified teachers);

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA, 3 which must describe—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services;

(B) The products and services that the project proposes to make available;

(C) How it proposes to develop and maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate design, that meets or exceeds government- or industry-recognized standards for accessibility; and

(D) The expected reach and impact of universal, general TA;

(iii) The proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA, 4 which must describe—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services;

(B) The products and services that the project proposes to make available; and

(C) The expected impact of targeted, specialized TA;

(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA, 5 which must describe—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients from a variety of settings and geographic distributions, that will receive the intensive, sustained TA products and services designed to impact the number and quality of IEPs with person-centered, rigorous objectives that support the progress of students with disabilities from grade to grade and preparation for postsecondary education, employment, and community living;

(B) The proposed approach to determine the readiness, capacity, and commitment of the—

(1) Project to engage specific LEA and school teams—that include administration, general and special education personnel, related services providers, families, and the community—in a manner that is responsive to the local context (as described in the Background section of this notice), giving special attention to engage those LEAs and schools with the greatest need for support;

(2) Public, private, charter, Tribal, and correctional LEA and school teams to specify the scope and duration of intensive work to effect change of policies, programs, and operations and allocate the resources; and

(3) Project, LEA, and school teams to allocate the resources to implement the TA plan and measure and evaluate the improvement, spread, and sustainment of the new policies, programs, and operations at the district and school levels, and among disaggregated populations; and

(C) The expected impact of intensive, sustained TA; and

(v) How the proposed project will intentionally engage families of children with disabilities and individuals with disabilities—including underserved families  6 and individuals—in the development, implementation, and evaluation of its products and services across all levels of TA;

(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) The organizations with which the proposed project will collaborate, three of which must be the FY 2023 funded National Center for Innovative Development of Educational Approaches for Leaders, National Center on Intensive Interventions, and National Center for Systemic Improvement, and the intended outcomes of the collaboration; and

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes, including the dissemination of pertinent products developed by other Department-funded projects; and

(7) How the project will systematically disseminate information, products, and services to varied intended audiences. To address this requirement the applicant must describe—

(i) The variety of dissemination strategies the project will use throughout the five years of the project to promote awareness and use of its products and services;

(ii) How the project will tailor dissemination strategies across all planned levels of TA to ensure that products and services reach intended recipients and those recipients can access and use those products and services;

(iii) How the project's dissemination plan is connected to the proposed outcomes of the project; and

(iv) How the project will ensure, by evaluating and, when necessary, correcting, all digital products and external communications meet or exceed government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the project evaluation,” include an evaluation plan for the project developed in consultation with and implemented by a third-party evaluator. 7 The evaluation plan must—

(1) Articulate formative, diagnostic, and summative evaluation questions, including important process and outcome evaluation questions, the answers to which provide evidence of the success and impact of the project reaching the outcomes listed in this notice. These questions must be related to the project's proposed logic model required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this notice;

(2) Describe how resources, costs, progress, and fidelity of implementation, as well as project outcomes, will be measured to answer the evaluation questions. In measuring progress of implementation across all levels of TA, the plan must include criteria for determining the extent to which the project's products and services reached intended recipients, data on how recipients use the products and services, and the impact of the products and services. Data collected must include feedback from recipients. The plan must also specify the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions and include information regarding reliability and validity of measures where appropriate;

(3) Describe strategies for analyzing data and how data collected as part of this plan will be used—

(i) To inform and improve service delivery and efficiency over the course of the project;

(ii) To refine the proposed logic model and evaluation plan, including subsequent data collection; and

(iii) To report formative and summative project performance; and

(4) Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation and include staff assignments for completing the plan. The timeline must indicate that the data will be available annually for the annual performance report (APR) and at the end of Year 2 for the review process described under the heading, Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of developing or refining the evaluation plan in consultation with a third-party evaluator, as well as the costs associated with the implementation of the evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,” how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities;

(4) The proposed project will have processes, resources, and funds in place to provide equitable access for project staff, contractors, and partners who require digital accessibility accommodations;  8 and

(5) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the management plan,” how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee's project director or other authorized representative;

(ii) A three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;

(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, during the second year of the project period;

(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of 5 percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;

(4) Describe how the project will engage doctoral students or post-doctoral fellows, including those who are multilingual and racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse, in the project to increase the number of future leaders in the field who are knowledgeable about special education leadership, knowledge development, TA, and Department-funded projects;

(5) Provide an assurance that it will post its annual project progress toward meeting project goals on the project website; and

(6) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the continuity of services to LEAs and schools during the transition to a new award at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:

In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), including—

(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts with knowledge and experience in school administration, special education leadership, TA, and project evaluation. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's products and services and the extent to which the project's products and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue funding accordingly.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants except federally recognized Indian Tribes.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education (IHEs) only.

Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.

Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested $55,345,000 for the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program for FY 2024, of which we intend to use an estimated $3,250,000 for this competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2025 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $3,250,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State lead agencies under Part C of the IDEA; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost sharing or matching.

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this competition may award subgrants—to directly carry out project activities described in its application—to the following types of entities: IHEs, nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the activities proposed in the application, and public agencies. The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application or that it selects through a competition under procedures established by the grantee, consistent with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2).

4. Other General Requirements:

(a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).

(b) Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554, which contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.

2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition.

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 70 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.

The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed below:

(a) Significance (10 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

(ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project.

(b) Quality of project services (35 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.

(ii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of that framework.

(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.

(iv) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

(v) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources.

(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director or principal investigator.

(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

(iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, and independence, of the evaluator.

(v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.

(vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.

(vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project.

(viii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

(e) Quality of the management plan (20 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products and services from the proposed project.

(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past, the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process, while permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.

4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting applications in accordance with:

(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering results based on the program objectives through an objective process of evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);

(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR 200.216);

(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States (2 CFR 200.322); and

(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: For the purpose of Department reporting under 34 CFR 75.110, we have established a set of performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. These measures are:

• Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed to be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified to review the substantive content of the products and services.

• Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or practice.

• Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of all Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful in improving educational or early intervention policy or practice.

• Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program includes the percentage of milestones achieved in the current annual performance report period and the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal year.

• Long-term Program Performance Measure: The percentage of States receiving Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination services regarding scientifically or evidence-based practices for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities that successfully promote the implementation of those practices in school districts and service agencies.

The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by OSEP.

Grantees will be required to report information on their project's performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).

The Department will also closely monitor the extent to which the products and services provided by the Center meet needs identified by stakeholders and may require the Center to report on such alignment in their annual and final performance reports.

6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, whether the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

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

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

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

This information collection request contains:

(1) OMB No.: 1905-0209;

(2) Information Collection Request Title: Densified Biomass Fuel Report;

(3) Type of Request: Three-year extension with change;

(4) Purpose: Form EIA-63C is part of EIA's comprehensive energy data program. The survey collects information on the manufacture, shipment, exports, energy characteristics, and sales of pellet fuels and other densified biomass fuel products from facilities that manufacture densified biomass fuel products, primarily pellet fuels, for energy applications. The data collected on Form EIA-63C are a primary source of information for the nation's growing production of biomass products for heating and electric power generation, and for use in both domestic and foreign markets.

(4a) Proposed Changes to Information Collection: There is a reduction in the number of survey respondents required to file EIA-63C reports. This reduces the annual estimated responses and associated burden hours. There is no change to the content collected on the EIA-63C.

(5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 76;

(6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 912;

(7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 1,277;

(8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: The cost of the burden hours is estimated to be $116,411 (1,277 burden hours times $91.16 per hour). EIA estimates that there are no additional costs to respondents associated with the survey other than the costs associated with the burden hours.

Comments are invited on whether or not: (a) The proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions, including whether the information will have a practical utility; (b) EIA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used, is accurate; (c) EIA can improve the quality, utility, and clarity of the information it will collect; and (d) EIA can minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, such as automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Statutory Authority: 15 U.S.C. 772(b) and 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.

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

This document allows 60 days for public comments. Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate forms of information technology. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register document to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

Abstract: To help expand historically underserved and overburdened communities' access to critical resources, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the Promoting Readiness and Enhancing Proficiency to Advance Reporting and Data (PREPARED) Program. The evidence-building technical assistance (TA) providers (thereafter referenced as Providers ) will operate in cooperative agreements with EPA to remove barriers and improve access for communities who have applied for or received financial assistance awards to tackle their environmental justice concerns. The Providers will deliver TA and training that is intended to enhance capacity in: grant application and administration, collecting grant related data; meeting federal post-award reporting requirements; project planning/design; and generating information necessary for outcomes assessment, evaluation, and identification of opportunities for improvement. With this Information Collection Request (ICR), EPA seeks authorization to collect post-award information from each Provider to track their progress. Collection of this information enables EPA to assess and manage the PREPARED Program, which ensures responsible stewardship of public funds; rigorous evidence-based learning and improvement; and transparent accountability to the American public. This ICR also requests authorization for the Providers to collect input and insights from communities who seek to obtain technical assistance services, as well as stakeholders who have valuable experience and expertise in community engagement and empowerment. These information collections will enable the Providers to document local priorities, needs, and norms to ensure that they develop useful and relevant technical assistance and training services. Furthermore, feedback about these services will enable the Providers to conduct self-assessments to identify best practices and areas for improvement.

Form numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: To be determined.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory for grant recipients as per reporting requirements included in EPA regulations 2 CFR parts 200 and 1500, and voluntary for public outreach information collections via surveys and focus groups.

Estimated number of respondents: Up to 4 grant recipients and approximately 4,800 respondents (over 3 years) to Public Outreach Information Collections.

Frequency of response: Grant recipients will submit one workplan each before beginning their project. Progress reports are expected quarterly for three years. A final report is required no later than 120 days after project completion. Public outreach information collections (via surveys and focus groups) will occur throughout the life of the PREPARED project.

Total estimated burden: The estimated burden for grant recipients is estimated at 362 hours over 3 years. The estimated burden for public outreach information collections is estimated at 2,210 hours over 3 years.

Total estimated cost: The estimated cost for grant recipients is estimated at $39,820 over 3 years. The estimated cost for public outreach information collections is estimated at $75,227 over 3 years.

Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the scientific and technical basis for agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. 10. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the Science Advisory Board Environmental Justice Science and Analysis Review Panel will hold two public meeting(s) to discuss charge questions, listen to agency presentations, listen to public comments and peer review the EPA's draft Revised Technical Guidance for Assessing Environmental Justice in Regulatory Analysis (EJTG). The Panel will also develop a self-initiated commentary outlining recommendations on advancing environmental justice science in rulemaking.

Availability of Meeting Materials: All meeting materials, including the agenda will be available on the SAB web page at https://sab.epa.gov.

Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office. Federal advisory committees and panels, including scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to the EPA. Members of the public can submit relevant comments pertaining to the committee's charge or meeting materials. Input from the public to the SAB will have the most impact if it provides specific scientific or technical information or analysis for the SAB to consider or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information. Members of the public wishing to provide comment should follow the instruction below to submit comments.

Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a meeting conducted virtually will be limited to three minutes and individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at an in-person meeting will be limited to five minutes. Each person making an oral statement should consider providing written comments as well as their oral statement so that the points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Persons interested in providing oral statements should contact the DFO, in writing (preferably via email) at the contact information noted under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , by March 14, 2024, for the March 21, 2024 virtual meeting and by March 28, 2024, for the April 3-5, 2024 in person meeting to be placed on the list of registered speakers.

Written Statements: Written statements will be accepted throughout the advisory process; however, for timely consideration by SAB members, statements should be submitted to the DFO by March 14, 2024, for consideration at the March 21, 2024 meeting and March 28, 2024, for consideration at the April 3-4, 2024 meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO at the contact information above via email. Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its websites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the SAB website. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit permission of the copyright holder.

Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact the DFO, at the contact information noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting(s), to give the EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

Meeting cancellation: The meetings announced in this Notice may be cancelled if a lapse in government funding occurs. If the meetings are cancelled, a cancellation notice will be posted on the SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov.

This document provides the receipt and status reports for the period from 1/01/2024 to 1/31/2024. The Agency is providing notice of receipt of PMNs, SNUNs, and MCANs (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (Biotech exemption); TMEs, both pending and/or concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

EPA is also providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., a chemical substance may be either an “existing” chemical substance or a “new” chemical substance. Any chemical substance that is not on EPA's TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances (TSCA Inventory) is classified as a “new chemical substance,” while a chemical substance that is listed on the TSCA Inventory is classified as an “existing chemical substance.” (See TSCA section 3(11).) For more information about the TSCA Inventory please go to: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

Any person who intends to manufacture (including import) a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose, or to manufacture or process a chemical substance in a non-exempt manner for a use that EPA has determined is a significant new use, is required by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with a PMN, MCAN, or SNUN, as appropriate, before initiating the activity. EPA will review the notice, make a risk determination on the chemical substance or significant new use, and take appropriate action as described in TSCA section 5(a)(3).

TSCA section 5(h)(1) authorizes EPA to allow persons, upon application and under appropriate restrictions, to manufacture or process a new chemical substance, or a chemical substance subject to a significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under TSCA section 5(a)(2), for “test marketing” purposes, upon a showing that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the chemical will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This is referred to as a test marketing exemption, or TME. For more information about the requirements applicable to a new chemical go to: https://www.epa.gov/chemicals-under-tsca.

Under TSCA sections 5 and 8 and EPA regulations, EPA is required to publish in the Federal Register certain information, including notice of receipt of a PMN/SNUN/MCAN (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (biotech exemption); an application for a TME, both pending and concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on the new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

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

No.

1. Submitting confidential business information (CBI). Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

In the past, EPA has published individual notices reflecting the status of TSCA section 5 filings received, pending or concluded. In 1995, the Agency modified its approach and streamlined the information published in the Federal Register after providing notice of such changes to the public and an opportunity to comment (see the Federal Register of May 12, 1995 (60 FR 25798) (FRL-4942-7)). Since the passage of the Lautenberg amendments to TSCA in 2016, public interest in information on the status of section 5 cases under EPA review and, in particular, the final determination of such cases, has increased. In an effort to be responsive to the regulated community, the users of this information, and the general public, to comply with the requirements of TSCA, to conserve EPA resources and to streamline the process and make it more timely, EPA is providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

For the PMN/SNUN/MCANs that have passed an initial screening by EPA during this period, table I provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the notices screened by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the notice that indicates whether the submission is an initial submission, or an amendment, a notation of which version was received, the date the notice was received by EPA, the submitting manufacturer ( i.e., domestic producer or importer), the potential uses identified by the manufacturer in the notice, and the chemical substance identity.

As used in each of the tables in this unit, (S) indicates that the information in the table is the specific information provided by the submitter, and (G) indicates that this information in the table is generic information because the specific information provided by the submitter was claimed as CBI. Submissions which are initial submissions will not have a letter following the case number. Submissions which are amendments to previous submissions will have a case number followed by the letter “A” ( e.g., P-18-1234A). The version column designates submissions in sequence as “1”, “2”, “3”, etc. Note that in some cases, an initial submission is not numbered as version 1; this is because earlier version(s) were rejected as incomplete or invalid submissions. Note also that future versions of the following tables may adjust slightly as the Agency works to automate population of the data in the tables.

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

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

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

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

As required by the terms of the NEEA, the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency appoints and reappoints eligible individuals to serve on NEEF's Board of Directors. The Administrator announces the following four-year appointments to NEEF's Board of Directors, effective 90 days after publication of this original notice:

Additionally, the Administrator re-appoints the following four individuals to serve a second four-year term:

Additional Considerations: As an independent foundation, NEEF is different from the Agency's several federal advisory committees and scientific boards, which have their own appointment processes.

Because NEEA gives complete discretion to the Administrator in appointing members to NEEF's Board of Directors, EPA is taking additional steps to ensure all prospective members are qualified to serve on the Board and represent a variety of points of view and bring with them a variety of expertise and experiences.

Section 10(a) of the National Environmental Education Act of 1990 (NEEA) establishes the National Environmental Education Foundation and its underlying terms. The statute in its entirety is available on EPA's website and may be accessed here: https://www.epa.gov/education/national-environmental-education-act#s10.

Section 10 of the NEEA provides the following, in pertinent part:

Establishment—

There is hereby established the National Environmental Education Foundation. The Foundation is established in order to extend the contribution of environmental education and training to meeting critical environmental protection needs, both in this country and internationally; to facilitate the cooperation, coordination, and contribution of public and private resources to create an environmentally advanced educational system; and to foster an open and effective partnership among Federal, State and local government, business, industry, academic institutions, community based environmental groups, and international organizations.

The Foundation is a charitable and nonprofit corporation whose income is exempt from tax, and donations to which are tax deductible to the same extent as those organizations listed pursuant to section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The Foundation is not an agency or establishment of the United States.

Purposes —The purposes of the Foundation are—

Subject to the limitation contained in Section 10 (d) of the National Environmental Education Act of 1990 (NEEA) to encourage, accept, leverage, and administer private gifts for the benefit of, or in connection with, the environmental education and training activities and services of the United States Environmental Protection Agency;

To conduct such other environmental education activities as will further the development of an environmentally conscious and responsible public, a well-trained and environmentally literate workforce, and an environmentally advanced educational system; and

To participate with foreign entities and individuals in the conduct and coordination of activities that will further opportunities for environmental education and training to address environmental issues and problems involving the United States and Canada or Mexico.

Programs— The Foundation will develop, support, and/or operate programs and projects to educate and train educational and environmental professionals, and to assist them in the development of environmental education and training programs and studies.

Establishment and Membership—

The Foundation shall have a governing Board of Directors (hereafter referred to in this section as `the Board'), which shall consist of 13 directors, each of whom shall be knowledgeable or experienced in the environment, education and/or training. The Board shall oversee the activities of the Foundation and shall assure that the activities of the Foundation are consistent with the environmental and education goals and policies of the EPA and with the intents and purposes of this Act. The membership of the Board, to the extent practicable, shall represent diverse points of view relating to environmental education and training.

Appointment and Terms—

Members of the Board shall be appointed by the EPA Administrator.

Within 90 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, and as appropriate thereafter, the Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register an announcement of appointments of Directors of the Board. Such appointments become final and effective 90 days after publication of the notice of appointment.

The directors shall be appointed for terms of four years. The Administrator shall appoint an individual to serve as a director in the event of a vacancy on the Board within 60 days of said vacancy in the way the original appointment was made. No individual may serve more than two consecutive terms as a director.

The Privacy Act provides that an agency may collect or maintain in its records only information about individuals that is relevant and necessary to accomplish a purpose that is required by a statute or executive order. The FCC has determined that the FCC/OMD-7, FCC Transit Benefit and Parking Permit Programs, system of records no longer meets this standard, because the FCC no longer administers the transit benefit and parking permit programs. The FCC transferred its transit subsidy program to the Department of Transportation's TRANServe program in 2018. All transit subsidy information has been deleted in accordance with National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) General Records Schedule (GRS) 2.4, Employee Compensation and Benefits Records (DAA-GRS-2016-0015-0017 and DAA-GRS-2016-0015-0018). The FCC transferred administration of the parking permit program to a private vendor in August 2023 and no longer maintains any records related to FCC employee parking. FCC-issued parking permits and related records have been destroyed in accordance with NARA GRS 5.6, Security Management Records (DAA-GRS-2021-0001-0006). Therefore, the FCC proposes to rescind FCC/OMD-7, FCC Transit Benefit and Parking Permit Programs.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(1).

The General Services Administration (GSA) routinely hires, reassigns, promotes and transfers Federal employees to duty stations in foreign areas ( i.e., locations outside of the United States, its territories and possessions). For this staffing activity, GSA pays for the cost of relocation, known as “permanent change of station” relocation benefits (see further 5 U.S.C. 5722(a) and 5724(d)). Relocation benefits include the cost of travel and transportation, as well as the cost of shipment of household goods to a new post outside of the Continental United States. In addition, most overseas employees are eligible for “renewal agreement travel,” a travel reimbursement authority that allows agency to leverage funds to pay for periodic travel back to the United States between overseas tours of duty for paid time off, known as “home leave” (see further, 5 U.S.C. 5728(a) and 5 U.S.C. 6305(a)).

For an agency to calculate the costs of relocation as well as renewal agreement travel, both federal travel laws require that the employee (or appointee) designate an “actual place of residence.” When such residence cannot be easily determined by the job candidate, the agency must instead make an administrative residency determination on behalf of the employee. The new GSA Form 5047 will help agency representatives ( i.e. human resources specialists) make a determination of the actual place of residence based upon documents and input provided by the job candidates, considered members of the public.

Typically, agencies use the definition of “residence” from the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952, codified at 5 U.S.C. 1101(33), which defines “residence” as a “place of general abode” or the “principal, actual dwelling place in fact, without regard to intent.” While for most employees (or appointees) the determination of an actual place of residence in the U.S. is typically straightforward, residency may be unclear if the appointee is already overseas and has been overseas for a long period of time. Long-term posts overseas are often characterized by the lease (or even sale) of the employee's primary U.S. dwelling, changes in the declared U.S. voting registration location, and/or changes in the state and local income or property tax jurisdictions.

To more effectively administer permanent change of station relocation as well as renewal agreement travel, the General Services Administration (GSA) has created a new agency form, GSA Form 5047, Actual Place of Residence Determination. This form will allow employees, job candidates, and the agency's human resources specialists, to more easily determine the actual place of residence by working through a series of guided questions on the form's worksheet. Following completion of the form's worksheet, the employee, candidate, and human resources specialist can summarize the determination on the form's front cover sheet.

The questions on the worksheet portion of the form are drawn from governing administrative law authorities, primary Comptroller General decisions such as: Rafael Arroyo, decision B-197205 (May 16, 1980), decision B-157548 (Sept. 13, 1965), 45 Comp. Gen. 136, and decision B-140748 (Oct. 29, 1959), 39 Comp. Gen. 337. Under these administrative law authorities, the place of actual residence is established at the time of appointment or transfer (see also decision B-136029, June 24, 1958, 37 Comp. Gen. 846). Use of this form is therefore recommended for all overseas appointments, transfers or reassignments and, in particular, those personnel selections of job candidates via agency transfer employed by a different U.S. Government agency and already present overseas.

Use of this form will allow GSA to comply with the Federal Travel Regulations, which require the administrative determination and documentation of the actual place of residence for all overseas appointments or placements (see further 41 CFR 302-3.509). In addition, this form will also allow the agency to leverage the renewal agreement travel authority ( i.e., the Home Leave Act of 1954, 68 Stat. 1008) only when appropriate and not in the rare cases of local foreign hires who have severed all jurisdictional nexuses with the U.S.

Significantly, this residency determination form can also be used to determine eligibility for the following other overseas allowance and benefit authorities: (a) the 45-day annual leave accrual authority (5 U.S.C. 6304(b)), (b) home leave (5 U.S.C. 6305(a)) and (c) living quarters allowance (5 U.S.C. 5923(a)(2)). Under each of these authorities, local hires who currently live in foreign areas are excluded from benefits eligibility unless they can demonstrate that foreign residence is temporary, is only pursuant to continuous employment overseas with the U.S. Government (or other U.S. interest), and finally, there exists a contractual transportation agreement that provides for the eventual return of the job candidate to a specifically-identified place of actual residence within the U.S.

Respondents: 25 per year.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Total Annual Responses: 25.

Hours per Response: 1.

Total Burden Hours: 25.

Public comments are encouraged, and are particularly invited, on: (a) whether this collection of information is necessary, (b) whether it will have practical utility, (c) whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate (and based on valid assumptions and methodology), (d) whether or not there are ways to enhance the new form's utility and clarity of the information to be collected, and (e) whether or not there might be ways in to minimize the data collection burden through the use of information technology.

Obtaining Copies of Proposals: We have provided a copy of the proposed draft GSA Form 5047 at the end of this notice below the signature block. A copy of the proposed draft form can alternatively be obtained through GSA's Regulatory Secretariat Division by calling (202) 501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090-XXXX, Actual Place of Residency Determination (GSA Form 5047), in all correspondence.

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Select Updates for the Medical Device User Fee Small Business Qualification and Certification Guidance.” On December 29, 2022, the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022 was signed into law as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law 117-328. section 3309 of the Omnibus—“Small Business Fee Waiver”—amended section 738(a)(3)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) by adding clause (ii) “Small business fee waiver.” The amended language gave FDA the discretion, beginning in fiscal year 2025, to waive the annual registration fee for device establishments that are small businesses if FDA determines that paying such fee represents a financial hardship. Additionally, the amended statute acknowledges that device establishments may be located in countries without a national taxing authority (NTA). As a result of this amended statutory language, FDA is issuing this draft guidance to propose select updates to the guidance “Medical Device User Fee Small Business Qualification and Certification” which will describe how FDA plans to determine if a small business is experiencing “financial hardship” which makes them eligible for a waiver of their registration fee. The guidance details what information FDA will review and consider in making this determination.

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 Select Updates for the Medical Device User Fee Small Business Qualification and Certification guidance. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Select Updates for the Medical Device User Fee Small Business Qualification and Certification Guidance” may send an email request to CDRH-Guidance@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number GUI00018007 and complete title to identify the guidance you are requesting.

Under the 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 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 information collection helps support implementation of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002 (MDUFMA) (Pub. L. 107-250), most recently reauthorized in 2022 from October 1, 2022, until September 30, 2027. To qualify as a “small business,” and therefore be eligible for reduced or waived fees, respondents submit information to FDA so we can determine whether the applicant is a small business. Sections 738(d)(2)(A) and (e)(2)(A) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379j(d)(2)(A) and (e)(2)(A)) define a “small business” as an entity that reported $100 million or less of gross receipts or sales in its most recent Federal income tax return, including such returns of its affiliates, partners, and parent firms. If a firm's gross receipts or sales are no more than $30 million (including all affiliates, partners, and parent firms), they will also qualify for a waiver of the fee for their first (ever) premarket application (PMA), product development protocol (PDP), biological licensing application (BLA), or premarket report.

The proposed updates to the Small Business Guidance describe how small businesses can show “financial hardship” to qualify for a small business waiver of the registration fee. Manufacturers seeking the small business fee waiver may provide evidence of a reported $1 million or less of gross receipts or sales in its most recent Federal income tax return, as well as evidence that they have filed a petition for bankruptcy and that the bankruptcy is currently active.

The proposed updates also reflect how firms based in jurisdictions without an NTA need not submit a certification from their NTA to be eligible for fee waivers or reductions.

Additionally, FDA intends to consolidate the forms previously known as FDA 3602 and FDA 3602A into a single form to be completed by foreign as well as U.S. businesses/applicants.

We propose the following revisions to the information collection:

• Consolidation of forms FDA 3602 and FDA 3602A into a single form, FDA 3602, to be completed by foreign as well as domestic businesses; and

• Addition of a “Registration & Listing Fee Waiver” section in the revised form, which asks if the business/applicant will apply for a registration and listing fee waiver and whether they have registered in the past. FDA recommends that applicants seeking this waiver include documentation supporting eligibility, including evidence that applicants have filed a petition for bankruptcy in United States Bankruptcy Court and that the bankruptcy is currently active (debts have yet to be discharged or a reorganization plan has not been confirmed) as well as evidence of prior registration as applicable.

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

Because we assume that current bankruptcy documentation is readily available to applicants, we assume no change to the Average Burden per Response for this information collection. Based on a review of the information collection since our last request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our total burden estimate.

FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Assessing COVID-19-Related Symptoms in Outpatient Adult and Adolescent Subjects in Clinical Trials of Drugs and Biological Products for COVID-19 Prevention or Treatment.” This guidance provides considerations for how common COVID-19-related symptoms can be measured and analyzed in clinical trials evaluating drugs or biological products for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in outpatient adult and adolescent subjects.

This guidance supersedes the guidance of the same name issued on September 29, 2020 (85 FR 61008). The September 2020 guidance was published to support public health efforts following a declaration, under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 247d), by the Secretary of Health and Human Services of a public health emergency related to COVID-19. In the Federal Register of March 13, 2023 (88 FR 15417) FDA listed certain guidance documents that FDA was revising to continue in effect for 180 days after the expiration of the COVID-19 PHE declaration on May 11, 2023, during which time FDA planned to further revise the guidances. The September 2020 guidance on assessing COVID-19-related symptoms in outpatient adult and adolescent subjects in clinical trials of drugs and biological products for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 is included in this list.

FDA is issuing this guidance for immediate implementation in accordance with our good guidance practices regulation (§ 10.115(g)(3)) without initially seeking prior comment because the Agency has determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate (see § 10.115(g)(2) and section 701(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 371(h)(1)(C)(i))). Specifically, we are not seeking prior comment because although the COVID-19 public health emergency under section 319 of the PHS Act has expired, COVID-19 remains a serious health risk for some individuals, and there is a need to ensure that sponsors are aware of FDA's recommendations to facilitate timely development of drugs and biological products for treatment and prevention of COVID-19. FDA is committed to supporting continued development of products to treat or prevent the COVID-19 virus by providing timely guidance. This guidance document is being implemented immediately, but it remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency's good guidance practices.

FDA considered comments received on the 2020 guidance. Changes from the 2020 guidance to this guidance include updating the reference list to refer sponsors to new resources that could support their drug development program ( e.g., patient-focused drug development guidance series); providing considerations for determining which subset of symptoms, and aspects of those symptoms, to assess ( e.g., mechanism of action of the drug); clarifying the item-level questions to make them more specific and adequate to support development of endpoint measures ( e.g., recall period, response options); and adding recommendations for global scale measures to align with the concepts of interest. In addition, editorial changes were made to improve clarity.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (§ 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Assessing COVID-19-Related Symptoms in Outpatient Adult and Adolescent Subjects in Clinical Trials of Drugs and Biological Products for COVID-19 Prevention or Treatment.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 312 pertaining to investigational new drug applications have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314 pertaining to new drug applications have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 601 pertaining to biologics license applications have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338. The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 50 and 56 pertaining to protection of human subjects and institutional review boards have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0130. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 11 pertaining to electronic records and signatures have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0303.

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

Viewing Material in the Docket

To view documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to the Federal Decision-Making Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2024-0042 in the search box and click “Search.” Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, and click on it. Select “Supporting & Related Material” in the Document Type column.

The new credential may also be viewed on the U.S. Coast Guard National Maritime Center website at https://www.dco.uscg.mil/national_maritime_center/.

The Coast Guard is issuing this notice of an update to the format of the Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC) by replacing the current passport-style MMC. The passport-style MMC was designed for the Coast Guard mariner credentialing program and is produced by the Coast Guard National Maritime Center (NMC) using specialty printers. These printers have been in use since 2015. They have reached the end of their lifecycles, and replacements are not readily available. The passport-style MMC requires printing on multiple pages to provide the requisite mariner information and endorsements. As noted, printing capabilities for the current passport-style MMC have diminished and, at times, creates production delays and backlogs in issuing MMCs to mariners.

To avoid future printing delays and production backlogs, the Coast Guard will implement a new MMC format and printing process. The new MMC is a single, two-sided page produced on synthetic paper with embedded security features. It is printed using readily available commercial printers. The paper is also tear and water resistant. A sample of the new credential is provided in this docket as described under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION portion of this notice. A document providing a more detailed overview of the individual sections and features of the new credential is also included in the docket.

The earliest implementation date for the new credential is March 1, 2024. We will notify the industry via the NMC website if the date changes due to unforeseen issues. The current passport-style MMC will not be immediately replaced for all mariners. Instead, the new credential will be issued during their next credential transaction. Mariners should not request a new MMC unless their current one is lost, damaged, or nearing expiration.

In the future, the Coast Guard intends to implement an electronically issued MMC that meets domestic and international requirements. In addition to the electronic credential, the Coast Guard anticipates maintaining some printing options to support the mariners and maritime industry needs.

This notice is issued under authority of title 46 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), sections 2104, 7101, and 7302.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The ICR documentation will be available at https://www.reginfo.gov upon its submission to OMB. Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to—

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consistent with the requirements of Executive Order (E.O.) 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, and E.O. 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, TSA is also requesting comments on the extent to which this request for information could be modified to reduce the burden on respondents.

Pursuant to the statutory authorities explained below, TSA has implemented a voluntary enrollment program for individuals to apply for the TSA PreCheck TM Application Program. Section 109(a)(3) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, Public Law 107-71 (115 Stat. 597, 613, Nov. 19, 2001, codified at 49 U.S.C. 114 note) provides TSA with the authority to “establish requirements to implement trusted programs and use available technologies to expedite security screening of passengers who participate in such programs, thereby allowing security screening personnel to focus on those passengers who should be subject to more extensive screening.” In addition, TSA has express, statutory authority to establish and collect a fee for any registered traveler program by publication of a notice in the Federal Register as outlined in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2006, Public Law 109-90 (119 Stat. 2064, 2088-89, Oct. 18, 2005).

Under the TSA PreCheck TM Application Program, individuals may submit biographic and biometric  1 information directly to TSA, which TSA uses to conduct identity verification and an STA of criminal, immigration, intelligence, and regulatory violation databases. Interested applicants must provide certain minimum required data elements, including, but not limited to, name, date of birth, gender, address, contact information, country of birth, images of identity documents, proof of citizenship or immigration status, and biometrics via a secure interface. TSA uses this information to verify identity at enrollment, conduct an STA, make a final eligibility determination for the TSA PreCheck TM Application Program, and verify the identities of TSA PreCheck TM -enrolled and approved individuals when they are traveling.

As part of this process, TSA sends the applicants' fingerprints and associated information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for the purpose of comparing their fingerprints to other fingerprints in the FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) system or its successor systems including civil, criminal, and latent fingerprint repositories. The FBI may retain applicants' fingerprints and associated information in NGI after the completion of their application and, while retained, their fingerprints may continue to be compared against other fingerprints submitted to or retained by NGI as part of the FBI's Rap Back program. 2 In retaining applicants' fingerprints, the FBI conducts recurrent vetting of applicants' criminal history until the expiration date of the applicant's STA. TSA also transmits applicants' biometrics for enrollment into the Department of Homeland Security Automated Biometrics Identification System and its successor systems for recurrent vetting of applicants' criminal history, lawful presence, and ties to terrorism and for future support of TSA's biometric-based identification at airport checkpoints.

TSA uses the STA results to decide if an individual poses a low risk to transportation or national security. TSA issues approved applicants a known traveler number (KTN) that they may use when making travel reservations. Airline passengers who submit a KTN when making airline reservations are eligible for expedited screening on flights originating from U.S. airports and select international locations including Nassau, Bahamas. 3 TSA uses the traveler's KTN and other information during passenger prescreening to verify that the individual traveling matches the information on TSA's list of known travelers and to confirm TSA PreCheck TM expedited screening eligibility.

When the STA is complete, TSA makes a final determination on eligibility for the TSA PreCheck TM Application Program and notifies applicants of its decision. Most applicants generally should expect to receive notification from TSA within 3 to 5 days and up to 60 days of the submission of their completed applications. If initially deemed ineligible by TSA, applicants will have an opportunity to correct cases of misidentification or inaccurate criminal records. Applicants must submit a correction of any information they believe to be inaccurate within 60 days of issuance of TSA's letter. If a corrected record is not received by TSA within the specified amount of time, the agency may make a final determination to deny eligibility. Individuals who TSA determines are ineligible for the TSA PreCheck TM Application Program will undergo standard or other screening at airport security checkpoints.

The introduction of additional enrollment providers, as discussed in the previous ICR revision, will allow enrollment providers to offer multiple price points for TSA PreCheck TM enrollment and renewal as well as additional enrollment locations, which will allow the public to select the best option for their needs. TSA plans to explore  4 new enrollment capabilities to include remote proctored enrollment to further expand TSA's ability to service the public. This revision also addresses TSA's plan to accept Mobile Drivers Licenses and other Digital Identities for identity verification at enrollment upon TSA approval. Lastly, TSA intends to continue to collect information from TSA PreCheck TM members after enrollment through voluntary customer experience surveys to better serve the public.

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

The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on September 20, 2023, at 88 FR 64921.

Title of Information Collection: OneCPD Technical Assistance Needs Assessment.

OMB Approval Number: 2506-0198.

Type of Request: Extension.

Form Number: N/A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Application information is needed to determine competition winners, i.e., the technical assistance providers best able to develop efficient and effective programs and projects that increase the supply of affordable housing units prevent and reduce homelessness, improve data collection and reporting, and use coordinated neighborhood and community development strategies to revitalize and strengthen their communities.

Respondents: Grantees and subrecipient organizations receiving funding to operate and manage programs administered by various HUD program office.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.

Estimated Number of Responses: 50.

Frequency of Response: 1.

Average Hours per Response: 8.

Total Estimated Burdens: 400.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In accordance with the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on new, proposed, revised and continuing collections of information. This helps the BLM assess impacts of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand BLM information collection requirements and ensure requested data are provided in the desired format.

A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on September 13, 2023 (88 FR 62819). No comments were received in response to that notice.

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

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

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

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

(4) How might the agency minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of response.

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

Abstract: This information collection enables the BLM to regulate the use and occupancy of unpatented hardrock mining claims, and to take any action necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands as a result of such use or occupancy. The BLM collects information from mining claimants who want to undertake the activities that are necessary to locate a mining claim or mill site. This OMB Control Number is currently scheduled to expire on June 30, 2024. This request is for OMB to extend approval of this OMB control number for an additional three (3) years.

Title of Collection: Use and Occupancy Under the Mining Laws (43 CFR Subpart 3715).

OMB Control Number: 1004-0169.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Mining claimants.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 70.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 70.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 4 hours.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 280.

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

Frequency of Collection: One time.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

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

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

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

Associated funerary objects were removed from CA-SAC-16 (also known as the Bennett Site) in Sacramento County, CA, over a period of more than seven decades by several institutions, agencies, and individuals. Sacramento State's collections stem from a donation made to the University by the estates of Anthony Zallio and Charles McKee, a 1950s excavation by the University under the direction of Richard Reeve, collections transferred to the University in 1977 from American River College (excavation led by Charles Gebhardt), a 1971 excavation by the University led by Ann Peak, and a 1990 excavation by Far Western Anthropological Group who donated the collection to the University. Portions of the collection have been previously published in the Federal Register and repatriated to the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Tract), California. An additional 338,273 associated funerary objects have been identified by the Tribe and consist of baked clay objects; faunal and floral remains; flaked and ground stones; historic materials; modified bones, shells, and stones; unmodified stones; ash, column, flotation, wood, and soil samples; pigments; quartz crystals; asphaltum; unidentified objects; and manuports. Of this number, at least 1,672 objects are currently missing, and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for them.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site CA-SAC-26 (also known as Pujune ) in Sacramento County, CA. These human remains and associated funerary objects came into the University's possession through excavations conducted in the 1950s under the direction of Richard Reeve and Clifford Curtice for the University; and donations made by the estates of Anthony Zallio and Charles McKee. Occupation of the site is estimated to have primarily occurred during the Late through Historic periods. The 1,837 associated funerary objects consist of baked clay objects; faunal and floral remains; flaked and ground stones; historic materials; modified bones, shells, and stones; unmodified stones; cordage fragments; ash; pigments; quartz crystals; and radiocarbon and pollen samples. Of this number, at least 20 objects are currently missing and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for them.

Human remains representing, at minimum, 68 individuals were removed from site CA-SAC-31 (also known as Sek ) in Sacramento County, CA. These human remains and associated funerary objects came into the University's possession through excavations conducted in the 1960s and 1970s under the direction of Jerald Johnson, John Beck, Ann Peak and Consiglio. Occupation of the site is estimated to have primarily occurred during the Middle through Historic periods. The 29,765 associated funerary objects consist of baked clay objects; faunal and floral remains; flaked and ground stones; historic materials; modified bones, shells, and stones; unmodified stones; manuports; pigments; unidentified materials; and midden and ash samples. Of this number, at least 11 objects are currently missing and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for them.

Human remains representing, at minimum, 16 individuals were removed from site CA-SAC-32 (also known as Joe Mound) in Sacramento County, CA. These human remains and associated funerary objects came into the University's possession through excavations conducted in the 1950s under the direction of Richard Reeve. The age of the site is not known. The six associated funerary objects consist of faunal remains; modified bones; and flaked stones. Of this number, at least one object is currently missing and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for it. Additional objects may be missing, which may include other categories of artifacts not listed here.

Human remains representing, at minimum, 18 individuals were removed from site CA-SAC-192 (also known as Kadema ) in Sacramento County, CA. These human remains and associated funerary objects came into the University's possession through excavations conducted by the University from 1959-1960 under the direction of William Beeson for a field school course; a 1977 transfer from American River College; miscellaneous small collections donated to the University by Inlow Cresta, David Boloyan and others; and a 1961 excavation led by William Olsen (collection donated to the University in the 1960s from the State Indian Museum). Occupation of the site is estimated to have primarily occurred during the Late through Historic periods. The 32,338 associated funerary objects consist of baked clay objects; faunal and floral remains; flaked and ground stones; historic materials; modified bones, shells, and stones; unmodified stones; ash; textiles; basketry fragments; quartz crystals; pigments; unidentified materials; and soil samples. Of this number, at least 1,533 objects are currently missing and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for them.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site CA-SAC-199 in Sacramento County, CA. These human remains and associated funerary objects came into the University's possession through excavations conducted by the University in the 1950s and 1980s. Occupation of the site is estimated to have primarily occurred during the Late through Historic periods. The 15 associated funerary objects consist of faunal remains; flaked and ground stones; and modified shells, and stones. An unknown number of objects may be missing from the collection, including those that fall under different artifact categories than what is listed, and California State University, Sacramento continues to look for them.

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

Pursuant to NAGPRA and its implementing regulations, and after consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes, California State University, Sacramento has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 104 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 402,234 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California; Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California; Ione Band of Miwok Indians of California; Jackson Band of Miwuk Indians; Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Tract), California; United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria of California; and the Wilton Rancheria, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, California State University, Sacramento must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. California State University, Sacramento is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted after the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

A total of two cultural items have been requested for repatriation. One item of cultural patrimony is an Oglala Sioux otter skin headdress or cape. From the Museum record: Item was worn by Chief Red Cloud/Sioux Warrior/Pine Ridge, SD; acquired by Harwood Hall, who had supervised Pine Ridge boarding school (1885-1893); donated to Museum in 1951; no documentation of associated hazardous substances. One item of cultural patrimony is an Oglala Sioux otter skin medicine bag including head, body, arms, legs, tail. From the Museum record: Acquired by Samuel Maus Purple (1878-1965) born Illinois; interested in fossils, archaeology; donated to Museum 1968; no documentation of associated hazardous substances.

The Museum of Riverside has determined that:

• The two objects described in this notice have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group, including any constituent sub-group (such as a band, clan, lineage, ceremonial society, or other subdivision).

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Oglala Sioux Tribe.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Museum of Riverside must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Museum of Riverside is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004 and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were collected at the Pierre Indian School in Hughes County, SD. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual; Inez La Roche identified as “Sioux” who was recorded as being 16 years old. C.B. Dickinson took the hair clippings at the Pierre Indian School between 1930 and 1933. Dickinson sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

The human remains in this notice are connected to an identifiable individual whose descendants can be traced directly and without interruption by means of a traditional kinship system or by the common law system of descendance.

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

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

• Virginia Wilhelm is a direct lineal descendant to the named individual's human remains described in this notice.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the lineal descendant, identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, 46 individuals, along with associated funerary objects, were removed from Siskiyou County, CA by R. J. Squier and Gordon L. Grosscup during archeological excavations occurring between 1952-1954. Excavations took place at two national wildlife refuges (NWR) operated by the USFWS, Tule Lake and Lower Klamath NWR, where human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from four sites (CA-Sis-2, CA-Sis-108, CA-Sis-223, CA-Sis-239). These objects have been curated at the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum at the University of California Berkeley since exhumation.

There are 373 associated funerary objects within this collection. They include: 268 Olivella beads, 16 flakes, 13 bangles, 11 crystals, 10 scrapers, 10 bird bone tubes, five lots of ochre/pigment (red, yellow, white), four awls, four pipe and pipe fragments, four projectile points, four lots of shell fragments, three bone tools, three animal bone beads, two haliotis ornaments, two bone whistles, two obsidian blades, two choppers, two bone pendants, two bone pins, two pebbles (agate, quartz), one lot of ashes and charcoal from pipe, one projectile point fragment, one unworked Olivella shell, and one worked bone fragment. Nine beads and four lots of shell fragments are currently missing from the collection, and the Museum continues to looks for them.

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

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

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 46 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 373 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Klamath Tribes and the Modoc Nation.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the USFWS must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The USFWS is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted after the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Franklin County, MA. The human remains collection currently held at Cleveland State University is largely the work of the former member of faculty in the CSU Department of Anthropology, Dr. John Blank (d. 2019). The sites known to be associated with the concerns of NAGPRA all fall within those excavated by (or alongside) Dr. Blank, beginning in the 1960s. Many of Dr. Blank's excavations took place as field schools for students, but some also contained components of rescue archeology (as sites emerged due to erosion). The human remains in question here were part of the Knapp site in Franklin County, MA. The individual appears to be 50-60 years of age. No associated funerary objects are present.

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

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

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

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains described in this notice and the Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Cleveland State University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. Cleveland State University is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Dale Site (1Wx77) Wilcox County, Alabama, in 1899 by C.B. Moore and donated to the PMAE the same year. The one associated funerary object is one lot consisting of a ceramic vessel and fragments.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Durand (Durant's) Bend Site (1Ds1) Dallas County, Alabama, in 1899 by C.B. Moore and donated to the PMAE the same year. The 14 associated funerary objects are: seven beads; one lot consisting of ceramic fragments and a bead; four lots consisting of ceramic vessels and vessel fragments; one ceramic vessel fragment; and one shell gorget.

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

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

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

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

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice as removed from the Dale Site (1Wx77; Wilcox County, Alabama), and the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Jena Band of Choctaw Indians; Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; and The Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice as removed from the Durand (Durant's) Bend Cemetery (1Ds1; Dallas County, Alabama), and the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Jena Band of Choctaw Indians; Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; and The Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

The three cultural items were removed from Santa Barbara and Los Angeles, CA. Accession #87.027: one Chumash Steatite Bowl, pre-1800, found on the island of Catalina. Bowl has several old breaks that have been repaired. Was probably found in shards. Donated by Charles Beardsley to the SRJCMM in 1987. Accession #92.065 A and B: one stone mortar and one stone pestle, found on the Santa Barbara Coast in the 1800s by the Harrington family. Donated in 1992 by Mr. Jess Rathbun.

The three unassociated funerary objects are one steatite bowl, one stone mortar, and one stone pestle.

The cultural items in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: Geographical information and expert opinion.

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

• The three cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the cultural items and Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of the Santa Ynez Reservation, California.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the SRJCMM must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The SRJCMM is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were collected at the Pawnee Indian Reservation, Pawnee County, OK. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 37 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 30 years old, and one individual whose age was not recorded. All three individuals were described as “Potawatomi.” Arvel R. Snyder took the hair clippings at the Pawnee Indian Reservation between 1930 and 1933. Snyder sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were collected at the Chilocco Indian Agricultural School, Kay County, OK. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 14 years old and described as “Potawatomi.” Lawrence E. Correll took the hair clippings at the Chilocco Indian School between 1930 and 1933. Correll sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, one individual has been reasonably identified. The 2,292 associated funerary objects are debitage (approximately 2,131 fragments), unmodified stone (66), chipped stone debris (24), chipped stone tools (14), projectile points (seven), hematite (one), faunal (17), shell (one), beads (two), red ochre (two), charcoal (16), daub (10) and a bullet.

The human remains and associated funerary objects listed above were removed from Geary County, KS, at a site known as Witt Mound 1 (14GE608). Dr. Patricia J. O'Brien and students excavated as part of an archaeological field school during the summer of 1974. Since then, the items have been under the stewardship of Kansas State University.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is reasonably identified by geographic location or acquisition history.

Kansas State University has determined that:

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

• The 2,292 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Kaw Nation, Oklahoma; Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; The Osage Nation; Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota; and the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco, & Tawakonie), Oklahoma.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Kansas State University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. Kansas State University is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

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

The three cultural items were removed from the state of MS. The two earspools and mask were gifted to the FAMSF by Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth F. Siebel, Jr. in 1984. Earspools (pair), Limestone and copper foil, 2 3/4 in diam. (7 cm diam.) each, 1984.89.2ab. Mask Shell, 5 1/2 H x 4 in W (14 H x 10.2 W cm), 1984.89.3.

The cultural items in this notice are connected to one or more identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures. There is a relationship of shared group identity between the identifiable earlier groups, tribes, peoples, or cultures and one or more Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: consultation with Tribes, museum documentation and art historical information.

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

• The three cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the cultural items and The Chickasaw Nation and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the FAMSF must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The FAMSF is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted after the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

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

Two burial kapa (bark cloth) were recently discovered within numbered editions of a book entitled Specimens of Hawaiian Kapa Vol I by D.R. Severson within the UH Library system. One edition, No. 20, 2 was found in the UH-Manoa (UHM) Hamilton Library, GN432.S37, while the other edition, No. 28, was found in the UH-Hilo Mo'okini Library, GN432.S37. All respective numbered editions of the book (No.'s 1 to 95) were published by Severson in 1979, with No.'s 1-50 including samples of burial kapa. UH Mānoa acquired a copy (No. 20) in the same year it was published; UH Hilo received a donation of a copy (No. 28) in 2019. Each book contained actual kapa samples that Severson had gathered over the years from various notable collections and individuals; however, the burial kapa was from Severson's personal collection. The only detail regarding their acquisition indicates that they were acquired from burial caves on the Kona Coast of Hawai'i Island. There is no way to determine if they were illicitly acquired or not. As the book contains traditional Hawaiian kapa acquired during the 19th century, its assumed that the burial kapa may have also likely been acquired during the same time period. Its further unknown if these burial kapa were exclusively made for burial or if they were personal belongings of the deceased.

A detailed assessment of the unassociated funerary objects was made by UH staff in consultation with representatives of Hui Iwi Kuamo'o and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA). There is a relationship of shared group identity that can reasonably be traced between the unassociated funerary object and present-day Native Hawaiian organizations listed in this notice. The following types of information were used to reasonably trace the relationship: anthropological information, historical information, and expert opinion.

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

• The two cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the cultural items and the Hui Iwi Kuamo'o.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of Hawai'i must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of Hawai'i is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, 14 individuals were collected at the Office of Indian Affairs Government School, Akutan Island, AK. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 68 years old, one individual recorded as being 67 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 65 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 47 years old, three individuals who were recorded as being 45 years old, two individuals who were recorded as being 40 years old, one individual recorded as being 30 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 19 years old, two individuals recorded as being 14 years old, and one individual recorded as being 13 years old. All individuals were identified as “Aleut.” Elizabeth Burrows took the hair clippings at the Office of Indian Affairs Government School, Akutan Island between 1930 and 1933. Burrows sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

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

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

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 14 individuals of Native American ancestry.

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

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were collected at “Carson Indian School,” (now Stewart Indian School), Carson City County, NV. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual, George Wessell, who was recorded as being male, 15 years old and identified as “Digger.” Frederic Snyder took the hair clippings at the “Carson Indian School” between 1930 and 1933. Snyder sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were collected at the Sherman Institute, Riverside County, CA. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual, May Hadurick, who was recorded as being female, 16 years old and identified as “Miwok.” Samuel H. Gilliam took the hair clippings at the Sherman Institute between 1930 and 1933. Gilliam sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

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

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

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

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains described in this notice and the Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk Indians of the Tuolumne Rancheria of California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before February 10, 2024. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers

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

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the summary or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The one item that is both a sacred item and an object of cultural patrimony is a pipe bowl and stem that was removed an unknown location, probably in Wisconsin, possibly from Madeline Island. The State Historical Society of Wisconsin's documentation does not indicate the specific provenience nor provenance of this pipe and stem. The pipe and stem are housed at the Society's Madeline Island Museum, which was founded in 1958 by Bella and Leo Capser, who collected historical items of Madeline Island and of broader Native American communities. The Museum and the Capser's collections were donated to the State Historical Society on August 27, 1968 with legal control of its collections being turned over to the Society at that time. This 1968 agreement between Madeline Island Museum, Inc. and the State Historical Society of Wisconsin does not prohibit it from following federal mandates under NAGPRA. During this transfer, much of the documentation noting provenience and provenance of the Museum's holdings had been lost prior to that transfer. The collection was first cataloged by the Society in 1983. Much of the original provenience and provenance information is missing and is currently unknown.

The one sacred object/object of cultural patrimony is a pipe (bowl and stem) that was assigned the catalog number MI1983.237.356 by the Society. The bowl is made of catlinite and has lead inlay. The stem is carved out of wood to have a spiral shape and is painted with blue-green, yellow, and red pigments. An eagle and geometric figures are engraved on the stem. Four feathers are suspended from the pipe stem with strings of beads. The Society has no records indicating that this pipe and stem were exposed to any hazardous substances while in the Society's stewardship.

Through consultation, it has been determined that the pipe and stem are used in a multitude of contemporary ceremonies by traditional religious leaders. They are also traditionally owned by an entire Tribe and are passed onto caretakers. They are not individually owned and are important to maintaining cultural and religious practices of the Tribe.

The State Historical Society of Wisconsin has determined that:

• The one object described in this notice is, according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization, a specific ceremonial object needed by a traditional Native American religious leader for present-day adherents to practice traditional Native American religion, and has ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group, including any constituent sub-group (such as a band, clan, lineage, ceremonial society, or other subdivision).

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the Bad River Reservation, Wisconsin and the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice must be sent to the Responsible Official identified in ADDRESSES . Requests for repatriation may be submitted by any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice who shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requestor is a lineal descendant or a culturally affiliated Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Repatriation of the cultural item in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the State Historical Society of Wisconsin must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural item are considered a single request and not competing requests. The State Historical Society of Wisconsin is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004 and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

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

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Tiverton graves at Anaquaket Neck in Newport County, RI, by Andre Robeson in 1869 during a Peabody Museum Expedition directed by Jefferies Wyman. Copper staining on the remains indicate that the individual was buried sometime during the Historic/Contact period or later (post-A.D. 1500). In addition, the remains are described in PMAE sources as “Pocasset,” and such a specific attribution suggests that the burial dates to the Historic period. According to historic documentation and consultation with representatives of the Wampanoag Repatriation Confederation, the Pocasset are a historically known Wampanoag community. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Stone Bridge burial site in Tiverton, Newport County, RI at an unknown date by an unknown collector. The interment most likely dates to the Historic/Contact period or later (post-A.D. 1500) as the Stone Bridge burial site is a known Historic period burial ground. In addition, the remains are described in PMAE sources as “Pocasset,” and such a specific attribution suggests that the burial dates to the Historic period. According to historic documentation and consultation with representatives of the Wampanoag Repatriation Confederation, the Pocasset are a historically known Wampanoag community. No associated funerary objects are present.

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

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

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

• There is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the human remains described in this notice and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah).

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

1. Any one or more of the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and, if joined to a request from one or more of the Indian Tribes, the Assonet Band of the Wampanoag Nation, a non-federally recognized Indian group.

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after March 25, 2024. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice was submitted before the effective date of the revised regulations (88 FR 86452, December 13, 2023, effective January 12, 2024). As the notice conforms to the mandatory format of the Federal Register and includes the required information, the National Park Service is publishing this notice as submitted.

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

The information requested by the questionnaire is for use by the Commission in connection with Investigation No. 332-600, USMCA Automotive Rules of Origin: Economic Impact and Operation, 2025 Report, instituted under section 202A(g)(2) of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 4532(g)(2)) (USMCA Implementation Act). The USMCA Implementation Act requires the Commission to prepare a series of five biennial reports on the USMCA automotive rules of origin (ROOs) and their impact on the U.S. economy, effect on U.S. competitiveness, and relevancy considering recent technology changes, and to provide those reports to the President, the House Committee on Ways and Means, and the Senate Committee on Finance. The first of the reports was delivered on June 30, 2023, with four additional reports due in 2025, 2027, 2029, and 2031. This investigation was initiated on October 15, 2023, and the notice of investigation was published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2023 (88 FR 81100). The Commission will deliver its report to the President and Congress by July 1, 2025. The 2025 report will be the second of five reports. The Commission indicated in its notice of investigation that it will need to obtain data and information through a survey. The survey will assist the Commission in gathering responses and data from motor vehicle producers to determine the direct impacts of the ROOs on the aforementioned factors.

Summary of Proposal: The Commission intends to submit the following draft information collection plan to OMB and invites public comment.

(1) Number of forms submitted: 1.

(2) Title of forms: The USMCA Automotive Rules of Origin Motor Vehicle Producer Questionnaire.

(3) Type of request: New.

(4) Frequency of use : Industry questionnaire, single data gathering, scheduled for 2024.

(5) Description of respondents: North American motor vehicle producers with U.S. production operations.

(6) Estimated number of respondents: 30.

(7) Estimated total number of hours to complete the questionnaire per respondent: 10 hours.

(8) Information obtained from the questionnaire will be treated as confidential business information by the Commission and not disclosed in a manner that would reveal the individual operations of a business.

Method of Collection: Respondents will be sent a letter with a link and individual code for accessing the online form. Once the online form is complete, respondents will be directed to submit the form by selecting a submit button.

Request for Comments: Comments are invited on (1) the elements of the draft questionnaire; (2) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary; (3) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (4) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

The draft questionnaire and other supplementary documents may be downloaded from the USITC website at https://www.usitc.gov/USMCAAutoROO.

Any comments on the draft questionnaire should be sent via email at USMCAAutoROO@usitc.gov. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they will also become a matter of public record. As such, proprietary or confidential business information should not be submitted as part of comments on the draft questionnaire.