This document announces the funding for ECAP, which is a new program authorized by section 2102 of Title I of Division B of the American Relief Act, 2025 (Pub. L. 118-158) and administered by FSA. ECAP will use up to $10 billion to issue 1-time economic assistance payments to eligible producers of eligible commodities for the 2024 crop year. These payments are intended to help farmers cope with losses from natural disasters and a difficult farm economy, and will help preserve family farms and ranches across the country while also continuing to ensure food and agricultural security for our nation. 1

The following definitions apply to this notice:

Application means the ECAP application form.

ARC means Agriculture Risk Coverage codified at 7 U.S.C. 9017.

Average gross farm income means the average of the person or legal entity's gross income derived from farming, ranching, and silviculture  2 operations, for the base period consisting of the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years.

If the resulting average gross farm income derived from items 1 through 13 of the definition of income derived from farming, ranching, and silviculture operations is at least 66.66 percent of the average gross income of the person or legal entity, then the average gross farm income may also take into consideration income or benefits derived from the following:

(1) The sale, trade, or other disposition of equipment to conduct farm, ranch, or forestry operations; and

(2) The provision of production inputs and production services to farmers, ranchers, foresters, and farm operations.

For legal entities not required to file a Federal income tax return, or a person or legal entity that did not have taxable income in 1 or more of the tax years during the base period (2020, 2021, or 2022), the average gross farm income will be the gross farm income, averaged for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years, as determined by FSA. For a legal entity created during the base period, the gross farm income average will include only those years of the base period for which it was in business; however, a new legal entity will not be considered “new” to the extent it takes over an existing operation and has any elements of common ownership interest and land with the preceding person or legal entity from which it took over. When there is such commonality, income of the previous person or legal entity will be averaged with that of the new legal entity for the base period. For a person filing a joint tax return, the certification of average gross farm income may be reported as if the person had filed a separate Federal tax return, and the calculation is consistent with the information supporting the filed joint return.

Average gross income means the average of the gross income as defined under 26 U.S.C. 61 of the person or legal entity, for the 2020, 2021 and 2022 tax years.

Base period means the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years.

Cotton means extra-long staple cotton and upland cotton.

Corn means only white, yellow, amylose, popcorn (excluding strawberry popcorn), waxy, and high amylase corn.

Crop year means the calendar year in which a commodity was intended for harvest.

CCC means the Commodity Credit Corporation.

Deputy Administrator means the FSA Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs.

Determined acreage means that acreage established by an FSA representative by use of official acreage, digitizing areas on a photograph or other imagery, or computations from scaled dimensions or ground measurements.

Double cropping means, as determined by the Deputy Administrator on a regional basis, consecutive planting of two specific crops that have the capability to be planted and carried to maturity for the intended uses, as reported by the producer, on the same acreage within a 12-month period. To be considered double cropping, the planting of two specific crops must be in an area where the FSA State Committee has determined that producers are typically able to repeat the same cycle successfully in a subsequent 12-month period under normal growing conditions.

Dry peas means Austrian, green, wrinkled seed, and yellow peas, excluding peas grown for the fresh, canning, or frozen market.

Economic loss means, as specified in section 2102(a)(4)(B) of the American Relief Act, 2025, the difference between the expected cost of production per acre for an eligible commodity and the expected gross return per acre for that eligible commodity.

Eligible commodities means barley, canola, crambe, corn, dry peas, extra-long staple cotton, flax, large chickpeas, mustard, lentils, oats, peanuts, rapeseed, rice, safflower, sesame, small chickpeas, sorghum, soybeans, sunflower, upland cotton, and wheat.

Expected cost of production per acre means, as specified in section 2102(a)(3) of the American Relief Act, 2025:

(1) For wheat, corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, and soybeans, the total costs listed for the 2024 crop year with respect to the applicable eligible commodity contained in the most recent data product titled “national average cost-of-production forecasts for major U.S. field crops” published by the Economic Research Service; and

(2) For an eligible commodity not specified in paragraph (1) of this definition, a comparable total estimated cost-of-production, as determined by the Secretary.

Expected gross return per acre means, as specified in section 2102(a)(2) of the American Relief Act, 2025:

(1) For wheat, corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, and soybeans, the product obtained by multiplying:

(i) The projected average farm price for the applicable eligible commodity for the 2024-2025 marketing year contained in the most recent World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates published before December 21, 2024, by the World Agricultural Outlook Board; and

(ii) The national average harvested yield per acre for the applicable eligible commodity for the most recent crop years, as determined by the Secretary; and

(2) For an eligible commodity not specified in paragraph (1) of this definition, a comparable estimate of gross returns, as determined by the Secretary.

Extra-long staple cotton means cotton that follows the standard planting and harvesting practices of the area in which the cotton is grown, and meets all of the following conditions:

(1) American-Pima, Sea Island, Sealand, all other varieties of the Barbandense species of cotton and any hybrid thereof, and any other variety of cotton in which 1 or more of these varieties is predominant;

(2) The acreage is grown in a county designated as an extra-long staple cotton county by the Secretary; and

(3) The production from the acreage is ginned on a roller-type gin.

Farming operation means a business enterprise engaged in the production of agricultural products, commodities, or livestock, operated by a person, legal entity, or joint operation. A person or legal entity may have more than one farming operation if the person or legal entity is a member of one or more legal entity or joint operation.

Grain sorghum means grain sorghum of a feed grain or dual-purpose variety (including any cross that, at all stages of growth, having characteristics of a feed grain or dual-purpose variety) that follows the standard planting and harvesting practice for grain sorghum for the area in which the grain sorghum was planted. Sweet sorghum is not considered a grain sorghum.

Income derived from farming, ranching, and silviculture operations means income of a person or legal entity derived from:

(1) Production of crops and unfinished raw forestry products;

(2) Production of livestock, aquaculture products used for food, honeybees, and products derived from livestock;

(3) Production of farm-based renewable energy;

(4) Selling (including the sale of easements and development rights) of farm, ranch, and forestry land, water or hunting rights, or environmental benefits;

(5) Rental or lease of land or equipment used for farming, ranching, or forestry operations, including water or hunting rights;

(6) Processing, packing, storing, and transportation of farm, ranch, or forestry commodities including for renewable energy;

(7) Feeding, rearing, or finishing of livestock;

(8) Payments of benefits, including benefits from risk management practices, Federal crop insurance indemnities, and catastrophic risk protection plans;

(9) Sale of land that has been used for agricultural purposes;

(10) Benefits (including, but not limited to, cost-share assistance and other payments) from any Federal program made available and applicable to payment eligibility and payment limitation rules, as provided in 7 CFR part 1400;

(11) Income reported on IRS Schedule F or other schedule, approved by the Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, used by the person or legal entity to report income from such operations to the IRS;

(12) Wages or dividends received from a closely held corporation, an Interest Charge Domestic International Sales Corporation (also known as IC-DISC), or legal entity comprised entirely of family members when more than 50 percent of the legal entity's gross receipts for each tax year are derived from farming, ranching, and forestry activities as defined in this document; and

(13) Any other activity related to farming, ranching, or forestry, as determined by the Deputy Administrator.

IRS means the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service.

Legal entity means an entity that is created under Federal or State law and that:

(1) Owns land or an agricultural commodity; or

(2) Produces an agricultural commodity.

Legal entities include corporations, joint stock companies, associations, limited partnerships, limited liability companies, irrevocable trusts, estates, charitable organizations, general partnerships, joint ventures, and other similar organizations created under Federal or State law including any such organization participating in a business structure as a partner in a general partnership, a participant in a joint venture, a grantor of a revocable trust, or as a participant in a similar organization. A business operating as a sole proprietorship is considered a legal entity.

Minor child means a person who is under 18 years of age as of June 1, 2024.

Ownership interest means to have either a legal ownership interest or a beneficial ownership interest in a legal entity. For the purposes of administering ECAP, a person or legal entity that owns a share or stock in a legal entity that is a corporation, limited liability company, limited partnership, or similar type entity where members hold a legal ownership interest and shares in the profits or losses of such entity is considered to have an ownership interest in such legal entity. A person or legal entity that is a beneficiary of a trust or heir of an estate who benefits from the profits or losses of such entity is also considered to have a beneficial ownership interest in such legal entity.

Person means an individual who is a natural person and does not include a legal entity.

Peanuts means all peanuts excluding perennial peanuts.

PLC means Price Loss Coverage codified at 7 U.S.C. 9016.

Producer means an owner, operator, landlord, tenant, or sharecropper that shares in the risk of producing a crop and is entitled to share in the crop available for marketing from the farm, or would have shared had the crop been produced.

Production inputs mean material to conduct farming operations, such as seeds, chemicals, and fencing supplies.

Production services mean services provided to support a farming operation, such as custom farming, custom feeding, and custom fencing.

Rice means long grain rice and medium grain rice, including temperate japonica rice, short grain, and sweet rice.

Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture.

Skip-row means a cultural practice in which rows of a crop are alternated with strips of idle land or another crop, as determined by the Secretary.

United States means all 50 States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

Upland cotton means cotton that is produced in the United States from other than pure strain varieties of the Barbadense species, any hybrid thereof, or any other variety of cotton in which one or more of these varieties predominate. In other words, it means any cotton that is not extra-long staple cotton.

USDA means the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

As provided in the American Relief Act, 2025, eligible commodities for ECAP include loan commodities as defined in section 1201(a) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (7 U.S.C. 9031(a)), excluding graded wool, nongraded wool, mohair, or honey. Therefore, eligible commodities include wheat, corn, sorghum, barley, oats, upland cotton, extra-long staple cotton, long grain rice, medium grain rice, peanuts, soybeans, other oilseeds, dry peas, lentils, small chickpeas, and large chickpeas. Eligible “other oilseeds” are canola, crambe, flax, mustard, rapeseed, safflower, sesame, and sunflower.

As provided in the American Relief Act, 2025, the eligible acres of an eligible commodity on a farm are equal to the sum of:

• the acreage planted on the farm to that eligible commodity for harvest, grazing, haying, silage, or other similar purposes for the 2024 crop year; and

• 50 percent of the acreage on the farm that was prevented from being planted during the 2024 crop year to that eligible commodity because of drought, flood, or other natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of the producers on the farm, as determined by the Secretary.

Acreage must be located in the United States to be eligible. FSA will calculate payments based on determined acreage, or on reported acres if determined acres are not present. Planted acreage includes any land devoted to planted acres for accepted skip-row planting patterns, as determined by the Secretary. 3

In situations where a producer planted, or was prevented from planting, both an initial crop and a subsequent crop on the same acreage for the 2024 crop year, the initial crop will be eligible for ECAP if it was an eligible commodity. If the subsequent crop that was planted or prevented from being planted was also an eligible commodity, it will also be eligible for ECAP if it was in an approved double cropping combination.

A subsequent eligible commodity will also be eligible for ECAP when it is planted or prevented from being planted after an initial crop that is not an eligible commodity or a fruit, vegetable, or wild rice, and the combination does not meet the existing definition of an approved double cropping situation (for example, an initial crop of mixed forage followed by a subsequent crop of corn). The acreage of the subsequent eligible commodity is eligible in these situations because the initial crop may be a reflection of early acreage reporting deadlines and reporting requirements of other FSA programs rather than the producer's planting intention for the 2024 crop year. FSA acreage reporting provisions require producers to report certain crops by certain deadlines, in each calendar year, and some FSA programs require a complete acreage report for program eligibility. For example, grasses and other perennial forages would have been reported to FSA in the fall of the 2023 calendar year and captured as an initial crop for the 2024 crop year; however, frequently perennial grass cover is planted to an annual crop (such as an eligible commodity) in the following spring. As a result of acreage reporting rules, the annual crop is reported as a subsequent crop even though this may have been the producer's initial intent for the 2024 crop year. Producers of eligible commodities reported in this manner had a reasonable expectation of planting and harvesting the crop in a single crop year, and they experienced increased input costs and falling commodity prices that are intended to be addressed by ECAP.

In cases where a producer reports both an initial eligible commodity and a subsequent eligible commodity on the same acreage and the combination does not meet the definition of an approved double cropping situation, only the initial commodity will be eligible for an ECAP payment. This rule applies even in cases where the initial eligible commodity failed or was prevented from being planted. Limiting eligibility to the initial planting of an eligible commodity in cases where the producer could not have reasonably expected to make use of both ECAP eligible commodities in a single crop year is consistent with other programs administered by FSA (for example, under the Individual Coverage option for ARC (see definition of “double cropping” in 7 CFR 1412.3)).

For ECAP, an exception to that rule applies when the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) Small Grain Crop Provisions allow for a reduced premium for small grain acreage that is intentionally destroyed prior to harvest, which is referred to as “short-rate.” In short-rate scenarios, producers graze the small grain acreage and then still have the opportunity to timely plant a spring commodity with a reasonable expectation to produce a normal yield, therefore making use of both commodities. Acreage that has been reported with both an insured initial small grain crop that was intentionally destroyed before harvest by grazing or other means and is timely reported to the producer's crop insurance agent in accordance with section 6 of the FCIC's Small Grains Crop Provisions, and is then followed with a subsequent eligible commodity that is not an approved double crop scenario, will be eligible for payment on both plantings of eligible commodities. In this scenario, both eligible commodities are planted within the recommended planting period and are expected to result in normal crop production. While this may not be considered an approved double cropping scenario in some counties under FSA's acreage reporting provisions, as both crop plantings could not be carried to final use in one crop year, the practice is standard for the distinct geographic production region and the producers suffered an economic loss on both crops.

Volunteer acreage, experimental acreage, and acreage with an intended use of green manure or left standing are not eligible for payment under ECAP because the producer did not plant the acreage, or intend to plant the acreage in cases of prevented planting, for the purposes specified in section 2102 of Title I of Division B of the American Relief Act, 2025.

In cases where the same acreage of a commodity was reported with two different intended uses, FSA will not issue duplicate payments for that acreage based on each intended use. If both intended uses were reported by the same producer, the producer will receive one payment based on the eligible acres of the commodity. If the two different intended uses were reported by two different producers, the producer with responsibility for input expenses for the acres will be eligible, and the producer who was not responsible for the input expenses must adjust the eligible acreage for that commodity on their application to remove those acres. If the producers shared responsibility for input expenses for the acreage, each producer must adjust their eligible acres on their applications to represent a share of those acres that is proportional to their share of the inputs. For example, if 100 acres of wheat were reported by one producer with an intended use of grain, and also by a second producer who leases that land for grazing and has a lease that requires the second producer to pay for one-third of the input costs, the producer reporting the intended use of grain must adjust their acres to 66.67 acres (two-thirds of 100 acres) and the producer reporting the intended use of grazing must adjust their acres to 33.33 acres (one-third of 100 acres).

The American Relief Act, 2025, provides that eligible acreage that was prevented from being planted must have been due to drought, flood, or other natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of the producers on the farm, as determined by the Secretary, as provided in 7 CFR 718.103. For prevented planted acres to be eligible for ECAP, producers must have filed a notice of loss on CCC-576, Part B.

Producers must have reported planted and prevented planted acres to FSA on FSA-578, Report of Acreage, to be eligible for payment. Producers who have not previously reported their 2024 crop year acreage of eligible commodities, and filed a notice of loss for prevented planted crops, may report their acreage of eligible commodities on FSA-578 and submit CCC-576 for prevented planting even if the deadlines applicable to other FSA programs have passed. Because ECAP is based on a producer's 2024 crop year acreage and those eligible commodities have already been harvested or grazed, producers who submit late-filed acreage reports for ECAP eligibility will not be required to pay the cost of a farm inspection and measurement applicable to other FSA programs. If requested by FSA, a producer must also submit additional documentation supporting the late-filed acreage report such as seed receipts, chemical and fertilizer receipts, precision planting records, harvesting records, geospatial data or maps, and published weather data. Producers must submit any required additional documentation within 30 days of the request. Acreage and prevented planting reports that are late-filed for ECAP eligibility will not be used to determine eligibility for other FSA programs for which these reports are required and the deadline applicable to the other programs has passed.

The American Relief Act, 2025, requires a producer to be actively engaged in farming, as specified in 7 U.S.C. 1308-1, to be eligible for ECAP. FSA will administer this requirement according to the regulations in 7 CFR part 1400, subparts C and G, which apply to FSA administered CCC programs that require a producer to be actively engaged in farming.

In addition, a producer must be one of the following to be eligible:

• Citizen of the United States;

• Resident alien, which for purposes of ECAP means “lawful alien” as defined in 7 CFR 1400.3;

• Partnership organized under State law;

• Corporation, limited liability company, or other organizational structure organized under State law;

• Indian Tribe or Tribal organization, as defined in section 4(b) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304); or

• Foreign person or foreign entity who meets all requirements as described in 7 CFR part 1400.

As required by the American Relief Act, 2025, the provisions of 7 U.S.C. 1308-3 regarding eligibility of foreign persons apply to ECAP, and FSA will administer those requirements as provided in 7 CFR 1400.401. The regulations in 7 CFR part 1400, subpart E, are applicable to foreign persons and legal entities (foreign and domestic) containing members, stockholders, or partners who are not U.S. citizens or resident aliens that own more than 10 percent of the legal entity.

The American Relief Act, 2025, specifies that the provisions of 7 U.S.C. 1308 regarding eligibility of Federal agencies, and State and local governments apply to ECAP. Federal agencies are not eligible for ECAP. A State, political subdivision, or agency thereof, is not eligible for an ECAP payment unless both of the following apply:

• The land for which payments are received is owned by the State, political subdivision, or agency thereof; and

• The payments are used solely for the support of public schools.

The total of payments to the State, political subdivision, or agency thereof cannot exceed $500,000 annually, except for States with a population less than 1,500,000, as established by the most recent U.S. Census Bureau annual estimate of the State's resident population. This limitation is in addition to the limitation per person or legal entity described in the Payment Limitation section of this document. For States with a population less than 1,500,000, they are subject to the regular per person or entity limit discussed in the payment limitation section below.

As specified in section 2102 of Title I of Division B of the American Relief Act, 2025, an ECAP payment will be equal to the greater of:

(1) 26 percent of the product obtained by multiplying the economic loss for an eligible commodity, which is the difference between the expected cost of production per acre and the expected gross return per acre for that eligible commodity, by the eligible acres of that eligible commodity on the farm; or

(2) The product obtained by multiplying the following 3 numbers:

(a) 8 percent of the eligible commodity's PLC reference price (7 U.S.C. 9011(19)), by

(b) the PLC national average payment yield for the eligible commodity (7 U.S.C. 9011(15)), and

(c) the number of eligible acres of that eligible commodity on the farm.

For the purpose of ECAP payment calculation, FSA has calculated a payment rate for each eligible commodity that is equal to the greater of:

(1) 26 percent of the economic loss (that is, the difference between the expected cost of production per acre and the expected gross return per acre) for an eligible commodity (referred to as the “economic loss payment rate” in this document); or

(2) 8 percent of the eligible commodity's PLC reference price, multiplied by the eligible commodity's PLC national average payment yield (referred to as the “minimum payment rate” in this document).

The payment rates for each commodity are shown in Table 1. An explanation of how these rates were developed is included in the next section of this document.

To calculate a producer's ECAP payment, FSA will multiply the payment rate for an eligible commodity by the producer's eligible acres of that eligible commodity. FSA will issue eligible ECAP payments as applications are approved. ECAP payments will be prorated by 85 percent to ensure that payments do not exceed the available funding. FSA may issue an additional payment if additional funding remains available after initial prorated ECAP payments are issued to eligible producers based upon the terms of this NOFA and applications received by the closing date.

The American Relief Act, 2025, specifies how to calculate the expected gross return per acre and expected cost of production per acre that were used to determine the payment rates for wheat, corn, sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, and soybeans. For these commodities, the expected cost of production per acre is equal to the total costs listed for the 2024 crop year with respect to the applicable eligible commodity contained in the most recent data product titled “national average cost-of-production forecasts for major U.S. field crops” published by USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS). 4 The expected gross return per acre for those commodities is equal to the projected average farm price for the applicable eligible commodity for the 2024 through 2025 marketing year from the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) published on December 10, 2024, 5 multiplied by the national average harvested yield per acre for the applicable eligible commodity for the most recent 10 crop years. 6 The net gross return is the gross return minus the expected cost-of-production.

An example of the resulting payment calculation used to determine the payment rate is shown below, in detail, using corn. The detailed values (a through e) used in the calculation are shown in Table 2.

To start, we estimated the net gross return for corn:

The next step is to calculate the economic loss payment rate for corn:

Next, as required for the comparison, we calculated the minimum payment rate:

Given that the economic loss payment rate is greater than the minimum payment rate, the payment rate for corn is equal to $42.91 per acre. The payment per acre is applied to all eligible acres.

For commodities for which the Secretary determines there is insufficient data from the USDA sources noted above, the American Relief Act, 2025, provides that the Secretary will determine a comparable estimate of gross returns and a comparable total estimated cost of production. Eligible commodities that do not have a price projection available in WASDE, nor a cost-of-production forecast in the “national average cost-of-production forecasts for major U.S. field crops,” include pulse crops (large chickpeas, small chickpeas, dry peas, lentils) and certain oilseeds (canola, crambe, flax, mustard, rapeseed, safflower, sesame, sunflower). Peanuts do not have a price forecast published in the WASDE. For commodities not available in the WASDE, price projections for the 2024-2025 marketing year were taken from the ARC/PLC 2024 Market Year Average Prices web posting as of January 2025. This is the only data set published by USDA that provides crop year price forecasts for those crops that are not included in the WASDE, and these prices are determined using similar methods as WASDE forecasts.

Regarding cost of production data for pulses and certain oilseeds, USDA researched and evaluated agricultural extension budgets and other sources. These budgets were not used as they are based on differing computational methodologies, can be outdated, and can vary considerably across states even with seemingly similar production environments. Instead, national average costs of production for pulses and certain oilseeds were estimated based on a statistical equation involving crops with complete data. After the equation was estimated, analysts applied the resulting coefficients to the 10-year NASS average harvested yield and the ARC/PLC 2024 market year average price of each commodity with incomplete data. These sources provide the best data available reflecting market conditions for crops with incomplete data and were used in the estimated equation to provide production cost estimates for these crops. These resulting production costs are reflected in Table 3, column c, and the calculation of the payment rate follows the same methodology as shown above for corn. For a detailed explanation of the payment rates for these crops, see the Economic document that is posted as a supporting document in Docket ID FSA-2025-0002 on http://www.regulations.gov.

The values used for each commodity's payment rate calculation are shown in Table 3. This table includes the data for all eligible commodities.

As provided by the American Relief Act, 2025, the total amount of ECAP payments received, directly or indirectly, by a person or legal entity (except a joint venture or general partnership) may not exceed:

• $125,000, if less than 75 percent of the average gross income of the person or legal entity for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years is derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities; and

• $250,000, if not less than 75 percent of the average gross income of the person or legal entity for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years is derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities.

As specified in the American Relief Act, 2025, these payment limitations are separate from the payment limitations that apply to other programs.

The American Relief Act, 2025, uses the term “average gross income” for payment limitations. This term has a different meaning than “average adjusted gross income,” which is what FSA and CCC programs typically use for purposes of administering payment limits. In order to implement the use of “average gross income” as required by the American Relief Act, 2025, ECAP will use the definition of “gross income” provided in the Internal Revenue Code in 26 U.S.C. 61. FSA is using this definition because FSA has not defined the term for any previous programs. In addition, using the Internal Revenue Code's definition is consistent with Congress's prior use of this term, and it will reduce confusion for producers and their licensed enrolled agents, certified public accountants, and attorneys when completing certifications of adjusted gross farm income. The term “gross income” is not used by IRS on tax forms; therefore, to ensure consistency and provide a logical approach for producers, average gross income will be calculated based on the applicable 3-year average (2020, 2021, and 2022) of the reported “total income” on IRS forms 1040, 1041, 1065, and 1120, or similar reported income.

The portion of a person or legal entity's average gross income derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities will be referred to as their “average gross farm income,” as defined in this document. As with the use of “average gross income” described above, “average gross farm income” has a different meaning than “average adjusted gross farm income” used in other FSA and CCC programs. Average gross farm income includes income derived from farming, ranching, and silviculture operations, which has the same meaning for ECAP as in other recent FSA and CCC programs that use the term “income derived from farming, ranching, and forestry operations.”

Similar to the calculation of “average adjusted gross income” in other FSA and CCC programs, if the average gross farm income derived from the items listed in the definition of “income derived from farming, ranching, and silviculture operations” is at least 66.66 percent of the average gross income of the person or legal entity, then the average gross farm income may also take into consideration income or benefits derived from the sale, trade, or other disposition of equipment to conduct farm, ranch, or forestry operations; and the provision of production inputs and production services to farmers, ranchers, foresters, and farm operations. Inclusion of those income and benefits in this manner was first introduced for the purpose of determining a producer's “average adjusted gross farm income” by section 1604 of the Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-234), amending section 1001D of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171). This rule has continued to be used in other recent FSA and CCC programs that use determinations of a producer's average adjusted gross farm income for payment eligibility or payment limitation purposes.

As provided by the American Relief Act, 2025, the payment attribution provisions of 7 U.S.C. 1308(e) apply to ECAP. A payment made to a legal entity will be attributed to those members who have a direct or indirect ownership interest in the legal entity, unless the payment of the legal entity has been reduced by the proportionate ownership interest of the member due to that member's ineligibility.

Attribution of payments made to legal entities will be tracked through four levels of ownership in legal entities  7 as follows:

• First level of ownership—any payment made to a legal entity that is owned in whole or in part by a person will be attributed to the person in an amount that represents the direct ownership interest in the first level or payment legal entity  8 ;

• Second level of ownership—any payment made to a first-level legal entity that is owned in whole or in part by another legal entity (referred to as a second-level legal entity) will be attributed to the second-level legal entity in proportion to the ownership of the second-level legal entity in the first-level legal entity; if the second-level legal entity is owned in whole or in part by a person, the amount of the payment made to the first-level legal entity will be attributed to the person in the amount that represents the indirect ownership in the first-level legal entity by the person;

• Third and fourth levels of ownership—except as provided in the second level of ownership bullet above and in the fourth level of ownership bullet below, any payments made to a legal entity at the third and fourth levels of ownership will be attributed in the same manner as specified in the second level of ownership bullet above; and

• Fourth level of ownership—if the fourth level of ownership is that of a legal entity and not that of a person, a reduction in payment will be applied to the first-level or payment legal entity in the amount that represents the indirect ownership in the first level or payment legal entity by the fourth-level legal entity.

Payments made directly or indirectly to a person who is a minor child will be combined with the earnings of the minor's parent or legal guardian.

A person or legal entity must provide the name, address, valid taxpayer identification number, and ownership share of each person, or the name, address, valid taxpayer identification number, and ownership share of each legal entity, that holds or acquires an ownership interest in the legal entity. ECAP payments to a legal entity will be reduced in proportion to a member's ownership share when a valid taxpayer identification number for a person or legal entity that holds a direct or indirect ownership interest of less than 10 percent at or above the fourth level of ownership in the business structure is not provided to USDA. A legal entity will not be eligible to receive payment when a valid taxpayer identification number for a person or legal entity that holds a direct or indirect ownership interest of 10 percent or greater at or above the fourth level of ownership in the business structure is not provided to USDA.

If a person or legal entity is not eligible to receive ECAP payments due to the person or legal entity failing to satisfy payment eligibility provisions, the payment made either directly or indirectly to the person or legal entity will be reduced to zero. The amount of the reduction for the direct payment to the producer will be commensurate with the direct or indirect ownership interest of the ineligible person or ineligible legal entity.

Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations, as defined in section 4(b) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304), are not included in the definition of “legal entity” specified in 7 U.S.C. 1308; therefore, they will not be subject to payment limitation.

FSA will generate pre-filled ECAP applications for producers based on their acreage of eligible commodities on FSA-578. Beginning in late-March 2025, FSA will mail those pre-filled applications to producers who had reported their 2024 crop year acreage of eligible commodities by March 10, 2025. Producers with a level 2 eAuthentication account or a login.gov account may complete their application electronically by visiting https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ecap.

Applicants must submit the FSA-63 ECAP, Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP) Application, electronically or to their local FSA county office  9 by August 15, 2025. Applicants will submit one application that includes all eligible acreage in all counties nationwide.

To apply for ECAP, an applicant must have also reported their planted and prevented planted acreage of eligible commodities to FSA on FSA-578 and filed a notice of loss for acres that were prevented from being planted on CCC-576, if applicable. FSA will not accept applications on which producers have manually entered acreage data except in situations where adjustment of eligible acres is required as explained in the Eligible Acreage section of this document.

Producers who had not reported planted and prevented planted acreage on FSA-578 and filed a notice of loss for prevented planted acreage using CCC-576 by March 10, 2025, must submit those forms as described in the Eligible Acreage section of this document by August 15, 2025. Once submitted, FSA will generate a pre-filled ECAP application for the producer to complete and sign.

Applicants must also submit the following eligibility forms to FSA by August 17, 2026, if not already on file with FSA for the 2024 program year:

• AD-2047, Customer Data Worksheet, for new applicants and applicants who need to update their information;

• CCC-901, Member Information for Legal Entities, if applicable;

• CCC-902E, Farm Operating Plan for an Entity; if applicable;

• CCC-902I, Farm Operating Plan for an Individual, if applicable;

• CCC-943, 75% of Average Gross Income from Farming, Ranching, or Forestry Certification, for producers and members of legal entities who are requesting an increase to the payment limitation;

• AD-1026 Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetland Conservation (WC) Certification, for the producer and affiliated persons, as specified in 7 CFR 12.8; and

• SF-3881, ACH Vendor/Miscellaneous Payment Enrollment Form. 10

General requirements that apply to other FSA-administered commodity programs also apply to ECAP. Producers that receive ECAP payments must be in compliance with the provisions of 7 CFR part 12, “Highly Erodible Land and Wetland Conservation,” for the 2024 crop year, and the provisions of 7 CFR 718.6, which address ineligibility for benefits for offenses involving controlled substances, for the 2024 program year.

All information provided to FSA for program eligibility and payment calculation purposes is subject to spot check. Participants are required to retain documentation in support of their application for 3 years after the date of approval. Participants receiving ECAP payments or any other person who furnishes such information to USDA must permit authorized representatives of USDA or the Government Accountability Office, during regular business hours, to enter the operation and to inspect, examine, and allow representatives to make copies of books, records, or other items for the purpose of confirming the accuracy of the information provided by the participant.

If an ECAP payment resulted from erroneous information provided by a participant, or any person acting on their behalf, the payment will be recalculated and the participant must refund any excess payment to FSA with interest calculated from the date of the disbursement of the payment. If FSA determines that the applicant intentionally misrepresented information provided on their application, the application will be disapproved and the applicant must refund the full payment to FSA with interest from the date of disbursement.

Applicants have a right to a decision in response to their application. If an applicant submits an application or required documentation to an FSA county office after the deadline, the submission will be considered a request to waive the deadline. Requests to waive or modify program provisions, including requests to waive the deadline, are at the discretion of the Deputy Administrator. The Deputy Administrator has the authority to waive or modify application deadlines and other requirements or program provisions not specified in law, in cases where the Deputy Administrator determines: (1) it is equitable to do so; and (2) the lateness or failure to meet such other requirements or program provisions do not adversely affect the operation of ECAP. Applicants who request to waive or modify ECAP provisions do not have a right to a decision on those requests. The Deputy Administrator's refusal to exercise discretion on requests to waive or modify ECAP provisions will not be considered an adverse decision and is, by itself, not appealable.

Equitable relief and finality provisions specified in 7 CFR part 718, subpart D, apply to determinations under ECAP. Persons and legal entities who file an application with FSA have the right to an administrative review of any FSA adverse decision with respect to the application under the appeals procedures at 7 CFR parts 780 and 11. The determination of matters of general applicability that are not in response to, or do not result from, an individual set of facts in an individual participant's application are not matters that can be appealed. Such matters of general applicability include, but are not limited to, eligible crops, eligible acreage, payment factors, payment limitations, and the payment calculation.

Any payment under ECAP will be made without regard to questions of title under State law and without regard to any claim or lien. The regulations governing offsets in 7 CFR part 3 apply to ECAP payments.

As required by the American Relief Act, 2025, the provisions regarding denial or program benefits in 7 U.S.C. 1308-2 apply to ECAP. FSA will administer these requirements according to the regulations at 7 CFR 1400.5.

In either applying for or participating in ECAP, or both, the applicant is subject to laws against perjury (including, but not limited to. 18 U.S.C. 1621). If the applicant willfully makes and represents as true any verbal or written declaration, certification, statement, or verification that the applicant knows or believes not to be true, in the course of either applying for or participating in ECAP, or both, then the applicant may be found to be guilty of perjury. Except as otherwise provided by law, if guilty of perjury the applicant may be fined, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, regardless of whether the applicant makes such verbal or written declaration, certification, statement, or verification within or outside the United States.

For the purposes of the effect of a lien on eligibility for Federal programs (28 U.S.C. 3201(e)), USDA waives the restriction on receipt of funds under ECAP but only as to beneficiaries who, as a condition of the waiver, agree to apply the ECAP payments to reduce the amount of the judgment lien.

In addition to any other Federal laws that apply to ECAP, the following laws apply: 18 U.S.C. 286, 287, 371, and 1001.

In compliance with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the information collection request has been approved by OMB under the control number of 0503-0028. FSA is providing ECAP payments to eligible producers of eligible commodities for the 2024 crop year. The ECAP payments will help producers of eligible commodities cope with losses from natural disasters and a difficult farm economy, and will help preserve family farms and ranches across the country while also continuing to ensure food and agricultural security for our nation.

The environmental impacts of this notice have been considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), and the FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799).

The purpose of ECAP is to provide assistance to eligible producers who suffered economic losses related to production of eligible commodities for the 2024 crop year. The Categorical Exclusions in 7 CFR 799.31 apply, specifically 7 CFR 799.31(b)(6)(vi) (that is, safety net programs administered by FSA). No Extraordinary Circumstances (7 CFR 799.33) exist. FSA has determined that this notice does not constitute a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment, individually or cumulatively. Therefore, FSA will not prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for this regulatory action.

The title and number of the Federal assistance programs, as found in the Assistance Listing, 11 to which this document applies is 10.121, Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP).

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, marital status, family or parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Individuals who require alternative means of communication for program information (for example, braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and text telephone (TTY mode)) or dial 711 for Telecommunications Relay Service (both voice and text telephone users can initiate this call from any telephone). Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at https://www.usda.gov/oascr/how-to-file-a-program-discrimination-complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail to: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.

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

The Materials and Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (METAC) advises and assists the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) and other Federal officials and agencies with respect to actions designed to carry out the policy set forth in Section 1752 of the Export Control Reform Act. The purpose of the meeting is to have the METAC members and U.S. Government representatives mutually review the updated technical data and policy-driving information that has been gathered.

The public session will include working group reports, open business discussions, and industry presentations. The closed session will include discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the open meeting and public participation requirements found in sections 1009(a)(1) and 1009(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. 1001-1014).

The open session will be accessible via teleconference. To participate virtually, submit inquiries to TAC@bis.doc.gov. Registration in advance is required to receive the meeting invite for virtual attendance. Individuals interested in participating virtually should contact TAC@bis.doc.gov no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 1, 2025. A limited number of seats will be available for members of the public to attend the open session in person on a first-come basis. Reservations to attend in person are not accepted. Registration in advance is not required for in-person attendance, but you will be asked to sign an attendance log when you arrive.

Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact TAC@bis.doc.gov no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 27, 2025, so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

To the extent that time permits during the open session, members of the public may present oral statements to the METAC. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of materials to the METAC members, the METAC suggests that members of the public forward their materials prior to the meeting via email to TAC@bis.doc.gov. Material submitted by the public will be made public; therefore, submissions should not contain confidential information. Meeting materials from the public session will be accessible via the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) site at: https://tac.bis.doc.gov, within 30 days after the meeting.

A Senior Advisor, performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1009(d), that the portion of the meeting dealing with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and the U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. 1009(a)(1) and 1009(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public. The exemption is authorized by section 1009(d) of the FACA, which permits the closure of advisory committee meetings, or portions thereof, if the head of the agency to which the advisory committee reports determines such meetings may be closed to the public in accordance with subsection (c) of the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)). In this case, the applicable provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) are subsection 552b(c)(4), which permits closure to protect trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential, and subsection 552b(c)(9)(B), which permits closure to protect information that would be likely to disclose information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action. The closed session of the meeting will involve committee discussions and guidance regarding U.S. Government strategies and policies.

If the meeting is cancelled, a cancellation notice will be posted on the TAC website at: https://tac.bis.doc.gov.

The April 11-15, 2025 meeting of the Pacific Council will be streamed live on the internet. The broadcasts begin initially at 9 a.m. PT Friday, April 11, and 8 a.m. Saturday, April 12 through Tuesday, April 15, 2025. Broadcasts end when business for the day is complete. Only the audio portion and presentations displayed on the screen at the Pacific Council meeting will be broadcast. The audio portion for the public is listen-only except that an opportunity for oral public comment will be provided prior to Council Action on each agenda item. Additional information and instructions on joining or listening to the meeting can be found on the Pacific Council's website (see www.pcouncil.org ).

The following items are on the Pacific Council agenda, but not necessarily in this order. Agenda items noted as “Final Action” refer to actions requiring the Pacific Council to transmit a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Additional detail on agenda items, Council action, and advisory entity meeting times, are described in Agenda Item A.3, Proposed Council Meeting Agenda, and will be in the advance April 2025 briefing materials and posted on the Pacific Council website at www.pcouncil.org no later than Friday, March 28, 2025.

Advisory body agendas will include discussions of relevant issues that are on the Pacific Council agenda for this meeting and may also include issues that may be relevant to future Pacific Council meetings. Proposed advisory body agendas for this meeting will be available on the Pacific Council website, www.pcouncil.org, no later than the end of the day Friday, March 28, 2025.

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

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

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

This is a request for renewal of an approved information collection. NOAA Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, annually collects economic data from commercial fishermen in the Gulf and South Atlantic shrimp fisheries who hold one or more permits for harvesting shrimp from federal waters (U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone). A collection of economic information from fishers affected by the management of federal commercial fisheries is needed to ensure that national goals, objectives, and requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA) and other laws are met. These data are needed to conduct economic analyses in support of management of the shrimp fishery and to satisfy legal requirements. Information about revenues, variable and fixed costs, capital investment and other economic information is collected from a random sample of permit holders. The data will be used to assess how fishermen will be impacted by and respond to federal regulation likely to be considered by fishery managers. No changes are requested with this renewal request.

The information will be collected on paper using a mail survey.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0591.

Form Number(s): None.

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

Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 650 permit holders.

Estimated Time Per Response: 45 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 488 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in record keeping/reporting costs.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to Obtain or Retain Benefits (permit renewal).

Legal Authority: Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

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

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

The purpose of this meeting is to provide recommendations to the Pacific Council for identifying new and/or innovative HMS fishing gears and methods. Topics will include improvements to the HMS exempted fishing permit (EFP) process, including potential modifications to Pacific Council Operating Procedure 20 and acceptable levels of bycatch in HMS; potential revisions to the draft HMS Roadmap, and consideration of a FIW Terms of Reference. The FIW intends to develop a report for the June Advanced Briefing Book, for Pacific Council consideration.

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

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

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

This is a request for the renewal of an approved information collection. The Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO), under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act) the New England Fishery Management Council (the Council) and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (the Commission) are responsible for conservation and management of marine fishery resources off the east coast. NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) enacts complementary regulations to Council and Commission actions.

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that conservation and management measures must prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery. These measures must be based on the best scientific information available. The Atlantic Coastal Act oversees coastal fishery resources that migrate, or are widely distributed, across the jurisdictional boundaries of two or more of the Atlantic States and Federal Government.

The use of vessel logbooks are essential tools in the management of fishery resources. Section 303(a)(5) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act specifically identifies the kinds of data to be collected for fishery management plans (FMPs), and the GARFO obtains much of this data through the logbooks, a web application, and vessel monitoring system (VMS) (which is approved under the 0648-0212 information collection) data. Logbooks are also known as Vessel Trip Reports (VTRs).

International, federal, state, and local fishery management authorities recognize the value of logbook data and use the data as a part of their management systems. Resulting data are used by economists, biologists, and managers to develop, monitor, and enforce controls on fishery harvests. Mandatory logbook reporting requirements are applied to all vessels permitted under the Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish, Atlantic sea scallop, Atlantic surf clam, ocean quahog, Northeast (NE) multispecies, monkfish, summer flounder, scup, black sea bass, Atlantic bluefish, spiny dogfish, Atlantic herring, tilefish, red crab, skate, and American lobster FMPs. If a vessel is permitted in more than one of these fisheries, only one report needs to be submitted to fulfill reporting requirements for all species.

The information collected using logbooks will be used by several offices of NMFS, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Councils and Commission, and state fishery agencies. The information is used to develop, implement, and monitor fishery management strategies. Logbook data serve as inputs for a variety of uses, including biological analyses and stock assessments, regulatory impact analyses, quota allocation selections and monitoring, economic profitability profiles, trade and import tariff decisions, allocation of grant funds among states, and analysis of ecological interactions among species. Additionally, the data serve and important means to facilitate enforcement and mitigate the impacts of interactions between fixed fishing gear and endangered whales. NMFS would be unable to fulfill the majority of its scientific research and fishery management missions without these data.

Data is collected electronically using software applications submitted over the internet.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0212.

Form Number(s): 88-30, 88-140.

Type of Review: Regular Submission [extension of a current information collection].

Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,927.

Estimated Time per Response: Vessel Trip Reports: VTRs are estimated at 4 minutes per response. Lobster VTRs estimated at 5 minutes per response. Shellfish VTR estimated at 4 minutes per response. Fish Online web application estimated at 4 minutes per response.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 17,154 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: 0.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act.

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

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

The purpose of this HMSAS webinar is to discuss relevant topics on the Pacific Council's April 2025 meeting agenda and potentially prepare supplemental reports for these items.

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

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

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

The subject permit is requested under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) and the regulations governing the taking of ENP gray whales by the Makah Indian Tribe off the coast of Washington State (50 CFR part 216, subpart J). The applicant, the Makah Indian Tribe, proposes to conduct a ceremonial and subsistence hunt consistent with the purposes of the MMPA and the regulations at 50 CFR part 216, subpart J. The Tribe proposes using both traditional methods ( e.g., a wooden canoe and harpoon) and modern methods (motorized vessels and rifles) to conduct the hunt, in order to balance the preservation of traditional cultural methods with maximizing the safety, efficiency, and humaneness of the hunt. The duration of the requested permit is 28 months, lasting from July 1, 2025 through October 31, 2027. The Tribe proposes to conduct training and hunting activities between July 1st and October 31st in 2025 and 2027. In each of those two years, the Tribe requests a maximum of 142 ENP gray whales to be approached, a maximum of 12 to be subjected to unsuccessful strike attempts or training harpoon throws, a maximum of 2 to be struck, and a maximum of 1 to be landed. All proposed hunting and training activities would take place in the Makah Tribe's usual and accustomed fishing grounds west of the Bonilla-Tatoosh Line as defined by 50 CFR 216.112.

For more information on the proposed method of taking, including the training and certification procedures for the members of the whaling crew, refer to the permit application and supporting materials available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/makah-tribe-permit-application-hunt-gray-whales. Section 104 of the MMPA governs the issuance of permits for the taking of marine mammals, and outlines specific procedures and timelines under which the permitting process must be conducted (16 U.S.C. 1374). NMFS is required to invite interested parties to submit written comments, data, or views within thirty days of the publication of a notice of receipt of a permit application in the Federal Register (50 CFR 216.33(d)(4)). Here, we have afforded interested parties forty-five days to submit comments, data, or views by mail, email, or through the regulations.gov portal. Due to the timeline set forth under Section 104, we anticipate we will be unable to extend this comment period beyond forty-five days.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), an initial determination has been made that the proposed issuance of the requested permit and resulting effects have been thoroughly evaluated in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the Makah Tribe Request to Hunt Gray Whales (NMFS 2023). The FEIS is available electronically at https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.fisheries.noaa.gov/2023-11/makah-waiver-feis-110923.pdf.

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

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• 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;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2024 at Vol. 89 100471. This comment period ended February 10, 2025. No public comments were received from this Notice.

Title of Collection: Schools of National Service Commitment Form.

OMB Control Number: 3045-0143.

Type of Review: Revision.

Respondents/Affected Public: Businesses and Organizations.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 200.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 100.

Abstract: The Schools of National Service initiative, formerly the Segal Education Award Matching Program, helps higher education and post-secondary institutions connect with AmeriCorps alumni. To qualify as a School of National Service, the institution must complete a commitment form, committing to provide one or more incentives to AmeriCorps members and alumni seeking to attend their institution. This collection allows AmeriCorps and the institution to enhance the educational opportunities available to AmeriCorps alumni because of their service. AmeriCorps is seeking to revise the commitment form to add checkbox options for career and technical education (CTE) and other program types the institution may offer; add checkbox options for whether programs are offered online, in person, or both; and add a field for the institution to indicate whether it offers benefits to senior citizens and at what age eligibility begins. The revision would also delete the entry for the percentage of education award that the institution will match for AmeriCorps alumni it accepts for admission to the institution. AmeriCorps also seeks to continue using the currently approved information collection until the revised information collection is approved by OMB. The currently approved information collection is due to expire on March 31, 2025.

DoD has concluded Reciprocal Defense Procurement (RDP) Agreements with 28 qualifying countries, as defined in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 225.003, at the level of the Secretary of Defense and his counterpart. The purpose of an RDP Agreement is to promote rationalization, standardization, interchangeability, and interoperability of conventional defense equipment with allies and other friendly governments. These Agreements provide a framework for ongoing communication regarding market access and procurement matters that enhance effective defense cooperation.

RDP Agreements generally include language by which the Parties agree that their defense procurements will be conducted in accordance with certain implementing procedures. These procedures relate to—

• Publication of notices of proposed purchases;

• The content and availability of solicitations for proposed purchases;

• Notification to each unsuccessful offeror;

• Feedback, upon request, to unsuccessful offerors concerning the reasons they were not allowed to participate in a procurement or were not awarded a contract; and

• Provision for the hearing and review of complaints arising in connection with any phase of the procurement process to ensure that, to the extent possible, complaints are equitably and expeditiously resolved.

Based on the Agreement, each country affords the other country certain benefits on a reciprocal basis consistent with national laws and regulations. The benefits that the United States accords to the products of qualifying countries include—

• Offers of qualifying country end products are evaluated without applying the price differentials otherwise required by the Buy American statute and the Balance of Payments Program;

• The chemical warfare protection clothing restrictions in 10 U.S.C. 4862 and the specialty metals restriction in 10 U.S.C. 4863 do not apply to products manufactured in a qualifying country; and

• Customs, taxes, and duties are waived for qualifying country end products and components of defense procurements.

If DoD (for the U.S. Government) concludes the renewal of an RDP Agreement with the Government of the Italian Republic and DoD executes a blanket public interest determination, as being considered, the Italian Republic will continue to be listed as one of the qualifying countries at DFARS 225.872-1(a).

While DoD has discussed and evaluated with the Government of the Italian Republic its laws and regulations in this area during an extended negotiation period since October 2018, DoD would benefit from U.S. industry's experience in participating in Italian public defense procurements. DoD is, therefore, asking U.S. firms that have participated or attempted to participate in procurements by or on behalf of the Italian Republic Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces to let DoD know if the procurements were conducted with transparency, integrity, fairness, and due process in accordance with published procedures, and if not, the nature of the problems encountered.

DoD is also interested in comments relating to the degree of reciprocity that exists between the United States and the Italian Republic when it comes to the openness of defense procurements to offers of products from the other country. Further, DoD would like to understand the degree to which U.S. industry feels that it would have equal and proportional access to the Italian Republic defense markets as Italian Republic industry would have in the United States under an RDP Agreement.

In addition, DoD will benefit from information provided by the public on anticipated impacts to defense programs and its supply chain if Italy no longer qualifies for a waiver to the Buy American statute and Balance of Payments Program. Not concluding this agreement would necessitate the removal of Italy from the list of qualifying countries in the DFARS.

The San Clemente Shoreline Protection Project was authorized by the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, Public Law 113-121, section 7002 for the purpose of reducing coastal storm damages by constructing a beach fill/berm along the San Clemente shoreline. The authorized project includes construction of an approximate 50-footwide beach nourishment project along a 3,412-foot-long stretch of shoreline using beach compatible sediment, with renourishment on the average of every 6 years over a 50-year period of federal participation. The project is further described in the Final Feasibility Report dated February 2012 and Joint Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report dated July 2011, SEA dated May 2023, and SEA dated March 2024. In October 2024, the USACE finalized a SEA evaluating the continuation and completion of the initial construction of the Project. The USACE determined the reduced proposed action is not likely to result in significant impacts requiring preparation of a SEIS.

Construction of the project was initiated in December 2023. However, due in part to equipment damage and sediment compatibility issues encountered at the Oceanside borrow area, construction was temporarily paused. To allow for operational flexibility, the March 2024 SEA evaluated inclusion of the Surfside-Sunset borrow area, a 106-acre borrow site offshore Surfside-Sunset beaches located 29 miles to the north of San Clemente, in Orange County, as an alternate borrow site for initial construction of the project. In April 2024, during the construction window evaluated in the March 2024 SEA, the USACE contractor placed 115,000 cubic yards of compatible sediment on San Clemente Beach as part of the initial construction of the Project.

The proposed action, as described in the NOI, involved identifying suitable location(s) containing enough beach compatible sediment required to nourish San Clemente Beach and complete the project, including future nourishment. Following monitoring of the beach nourishment site, USACE will determine the appropriate frequency and borrow material quantity for beach nourishment and whether a different borrow site would be needed for those future renourishments. USACE will evaluate the proposed impacts of future renourishment placements following monitoring.

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

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

OMB Control No.: 3060-0999.

Title: Hearing Loss Compatible Wireless Handsets Section 20.19 and Hearing Aid Compatibility Act.

Form Numbers: FCC Form 655 and FCC Form 855.

Type of Review: Revision to the currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents: 934 respondents; 934 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 13.92 hours per response (average).

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

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310 and 610 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 12,998 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: The Commission is requesting that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve a revision to the Commission's currently approved information collection for OMB Control No. 3060-0999. This information collection relates to the Commission's Hearing Loss Compatible Wireless Handsets rules at section 20.19 of the Commission's rules. This revision is necessary to implement the final rules that the Commission adopted on October 17, 2024, in a Report and Order, WT Docket No. 23-388, FCC 24-112, that the Commission released on October 18, 2024. This Report and Order revised the heading of section 20.19 of the Commission's rules from “Hearing aid-compatible mobile handsets” to “Hearing loss compatible wireless handsets.” In addition, the revisions that the Commission adopted to section 20.19(b)(3)(iii), (f), (h), and (i)(4)-(5) constitute new or modified information collections subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. These rules will become effective following OMB's completion of its review of these revised rules. Once OMB completes its review of these revisions, the Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of section 20.19(b)(3)(iii), (f), (h), and (i)(4)-(5).

The final rules that the Commission adopted require all wireless handset models to be hearing aid compatible. These revised rules ensure that consumers with hearing loss will have equal access to the same handset models as consumers without hearing loss. In order to ensure compliance with this 100% hearing aid compatibility requirement, the Commission adopted revised labeling, website posting, and certification requirements along with removing outdated and unnecessary information collection requirements. The removal of these outdated information collection requirements significantly reduces regulatory burden and cost for handset manufacturers and service providers.

The revised hearing aid compatibility rules include a requirement that a certain number of handset models that handset manufacturers and service providers offer for sale or use in the United States meet Bluetooth coupling requirements. This Bluetooth coupling requirement will benefit consumers by ensuring more universal connectivity between handset models and hearing aids, including over-the-counter hearing aids, and reduces the issue of certain handset models only being able to pair with certain hearing aids. In order to ensure compliance with this new Bluetooth coupling requirement, the Commission adopted a requirement that handset manufacturers submit a sworn declaration attesting to the handset model's compliance with these new Bluetooth coupling requirements. This certification requirement is contained in section 20.19(b)(3)(iii) and requires handset manufacturers to provide: (1) the specific Bluetooth coupling standard included in each handset model; (2) that the relevant handset model has been tested to ensure compliance with the designated Bluetooth coupling standard; and (3) after the transition to a non-proprietary Bluetooth requirement, that the included Bluetooth coupling technology is consistent with the Bluetooth functionality requirements. The Commission adopted this attestation requirement based on the recommendation of handset manufacturers who stated that adopting an attestation requirement is consistent with the Commission's equipment certification process.

In the Report and Order, the Commission revised its external printed package labeling requirements for handset models as well as requirements related to what information must be included within a handset model's packaging either in the form of a printed insert or a printed handset manual. The Commission is requiring that a handset model's external printed package label indicate whether the handset model includes Bluetooth coupling capabilities or telecoil coupling capabilities or both, and in the case of Bluetooth coupling which Bluetooth technology the handset model incorporates. The Commission is also requiring handset manufacturers and service providers to include information on the hearing aid compatibility settings of handset models and how consumers can turn these settings on and off. As part of these revisions, the Commission eliminated outdated labeling requirements which were no longer necessary and that might cause consumer confusion if retained. By eliminating these outdated requirements, the Commission reduced regulatory burden and cost to handset manufacturers and service providers. The revised labeling requirements are in section 20.19(f)(1) and (2) of the Commission's rules and these revised requirements ensure that consumers have the information that they need to make informed handset model purchasing decisions.

In addition to these revised labeling rules, the Commission determined to allow handset manufacturers and service providers to use digital labeling technology as an alternative to including a printed insert or printed handset manual in a handset model's packaging. Handset manufacturers and service providers choosing this option must maintain publicly accessible websites where consumers can find the required hearing aid compatibility information, and they must provide consumers with a Quick-Response (QR) code and the related website address where the required hearing aid compatibility information can be found. The Commission decided to allow the use of digital labeling technology at the request of handset manufacturers and service providers who argued that the use of digital labeling would reduce regulatory burden and cost for them. The use of digital labeling will also ensure that consumers have access to the most up-to-date handset model information. The Commission's new digital labeling rules are at section 20.19(f)(3) of the Commission's rules.

Along these same lines, the Commission revised its website posting requirements that apply to handset manufacturers and service providers who maintain publicly accessible websites. These companies must indicate on their publicly accessible websites which handset models that they offer for sale or use in the United States meet telecoil certification requirements and which meet Bluetooth coupling requirements. In addition, these companies must list a handset model's conversational gain if the handset model was certified as hearing aid-compatible using a standard that includes volume control requirements. The Commission also adopted point-of-contact requirements that require handset manufacturers and service providers to list contact information that consumers can use to ask knowledgeable company employees compatibility questions that they might have concerning the handset models that these companies offer for sale or use in the United States. Part of these revisions also included eliminating out-of-date website posting and record retention requirements that no longer served a useful purpose. The elimination of these outdated information collection requirements reduce regulatory burden and cost for handset manufacturers and service providers. The revised website posting requirements are at section 20.19(h) of the Commission's rules.

Finally, the Commission revised its annual certification requirements for handset manufacturers and service providers. After the 100% hearing aid compatibility transition period ends for handset manufacturers, these companies will no longer file FCC Form 655. Instead, handset manufacturers will start filing FCC Form 855 and service providers will continue to file this form. FCC Form 855 is a streamlined certification form that does not require the detail handset model information that FCC Form 655 collects. This change will significantly reduce regulatory burden and cost for handset manufacturers. In addition, the Commission is updating FCC Form 855 to ensure it collects only relevant information consistent with the Commission's 100% hearing aid compatibility requirement. These updates include removing outdated questions and streamlining the information that the form collects. The revised annual certification requirements are at section 20.19 (i)(4) and (5) of the Commission's rules.

Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) and the Suspension and Debarment Official (SDO) have taken final action in the following case:

Liping Zhang, Ph.D., Baylor College of Medicine (BCM): Based on evidence from an investigation conducted by BCM, ORI's oversight review of BCM's investigation, and additional evidence obtained and analysis conducted by ORI during its oversight review, ORI found that Dr. Liping Zhang, former Assistant Professor in the Department of Medicine, Section of Nephrology, BCM, engaged in research misconduct under 42 CFR part 93 in research supported by PHS funds, specifically NIDDK, NIH, grants R37 DK037175 and P30 DK079638 and NCI, NIH, grant P30 CA016672.

ORI found by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent intentionally and knowingly falsified and/or fabricated western blot images and microscopy images by manipulating the images, using unrelated images, or reusing and relabeling the same images to represent falsely different experimental results in three (3) PHS-supported unpublished manuscripts submitted for publication and four (4) grant applications submitted for PHS funds. ORI found that these acts constitute a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community.

The affected manuscripts and grant applications are:

• Nucleolar protein 66 functions as a novel negative regulator of satellite cells. Original manuscript submitted to EMBO Reports in October 2017 (hereafter referred to as “ EMBO Rep. First Submission”).

• Nucleolar protein 66 functions as a novel negative regulator of satellite cells. Second submission to EMBO Reports in April 2018 (hereafter referred to as “ EMBO Rep. Second Submission”).

• NO66, an endogenous mediator of muscle growth, suppresses myogenic genes by forming repressive complex with RBBP4 and HDAC2. Original manuscript submitted to Cell Reports in July 2015 (hereafter referred to as “ Cell Rep. Submission”).

• R01 DK037175-32, “Protein nutrition in experimental uremia,” submitted to NIDDK, NIH, on March 3, 2017, awarded from May 2, 2018-March 31, 2022.

• R01 AR070845-01A1, “A new pathway to muscle atrophy in chronic kidney disease,” submitted to National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), NIH, on November 3, 2016, administratively withdrawn by NIAMS on March 1, 2019.

• R01 AR069533-01A1, “Epigenetic control of skeletal muscle development and aging-related muscle regeneration,” submitted to NIAMS, NIH, on March 1, 2016, administratively withdrawn by NIAMS on November 1, 2018.

• R01 DK116886-01, “A demethylase-dependent mechanism regulates whitening of brown adipocytes and obesity,” submitted to NIDDK, NIH, on June 2, 2017, administratively withdrawn by NIAMS on November 2, 2019.

Specifically, ORI found by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by intentionally and knowingly falsifying and/or fabricating:

• a western blot image in Figure 1G of EMBO Rep. Second Submission by manipulating a part of the source image to falsely represent an increase in myosin heavy chain expression in differentiation medium.

• immunofluorescent microscopy images in Figure 2A of EMBO Rep. First Submission and Figure 4A of NIH grant application R01 AR070845-01A1 by manipulating parts of the source images to falsely represent the absence of NO66 and Pax7 co-expression in Pax7+ cells.

• western blot images in Figure 5A of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure Expanded View (EV) 5C of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 8A of NIH grant application R01 DK037175-32, Figure 7A of NIH grant application R01 DK116886-01, and Figure 11A of NIH grant application R01 AR070845-01A1 by manipulating parts of the source images to falsely represent: (1) a lack of expression of retinoblastoma binding protein 4 in the IgG sample, and (2) a positive expression of histone deacetylase 2 in the sample treated with anti-HA antibody.

• Figure 2G of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figures 2H, 6E, and 7C of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 3G of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 3D of NIH grant application R01 AR069533-01A1, and Figure 8C of NIH grant application R01 AR070845-01A1 by reusing and relabeling western blot images to falsely represent both myogenin and GAPDH expression as follows:

• Figure 4A of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 6A of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 5A of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 7A of NIH grant application R01 AR069533-01A1, Figure 10A of NIH grant application R01 AR070845-01A1, and Figure 7A of NIH grant application R01 DK037175-32 by reusing and relabeling one western blot image to falsely represent the results of two replicated experiments.

• Figures 4B and 5B of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 6B of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 5C of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 7B of NIH grant application R01 DK116886-01, Figures 7B and 8B of NIH grant application R01 DK037175-32, Figures 10B and 11B of NIH grant application R01 AR070845-01A1, and Figure 7B of NIH grant application R01 AR069533-01A1 by reusing and relabeling three sets of bands from the same source western blot images to falsely represent the expression of different proteins as follows:

Figure 5B (second band in first row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 7B (second band in first row) of R01 DK116886-01, Figure 8B (second band in first row) of R01 DK037175-32, and Figure 11B (second band in first row) of R01 AR070845-01A1 to represent GAL4.

Figure 4B (third band in first row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 5C (third band in first row) of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 6B (third band in first row) of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 7B (third band in first row) of R01 DK037175-32, Figure 10B (third band in first row) of R01 AR070845-01A1, and Figure 7B (third band in first row) of R01 AR069533-01A1 to represent MHC.

Figure 5B (second band in second row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 7B (second band in second row) of R01 DK116886-01, Figure 8B (second band in second row) of R01 DK037175-32, and Figure 11B (second band in second row) of R01 AR070845-01A1 to represent NO66.

Figure 4B (third band in third row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 5C (third band in third row) of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 6B (third band in third row) of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 7B (third band in third row) of R01 DK037175-32, Figure 10B (third band in third row) of R01 AR070845-01A1, and Figure 7B (third band in second row) of R01 AR069533-01A1 to represent myogenin.

Figure 5B (first and second bands in bottom row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 7B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 DK116886-01, Figure 8B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 DK037175-32, and Figure 11B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 AR070845-01A1 to represent H3.

Figure 4B (first and second bands in bottom row) of EMBO Rep. First Submission, Figure 5C (first and second bands in bottom row) of Cell Rep. Submission, Figure 6B (first and second bands in bottom row) of EMBO Rep. Second Submission, Figure 7B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 DK037175-32, Figure 10B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 AR070845-01A1 to represent GAPDH, and Figure 7B (first and second bands in bottom row) of R01 AR069533-01A1 to represent GAPDH.

On December 6, 2024, based on the information in the administrative record, the HHS SDO proposed a two-year period of debarment under 2 CFR 180.800(d)—“Any other cause that is so serious or compelling in nature that it affects your present responsibility” to protect the Federal Government's interest. HHS provided Respondent the opportunity to contest the proposed debarment under 42 CFR part 93 by requesting a hearing before an administrative law judge with the HHS Departmental Appeals Board or alternatively, in lieu of requesting a hearing, to contest under 2 CFR part 180. Respondent did not contest within the prescribed 30-day notice period. Accordingly, the following administrative actions have been implemented:

(1) For a period of two (2) years, beginning on January 16, 2025, Respondent is debarred from participating in “covered transactions” as defined in 42 CFR 180.200 and procurement transactions covered under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR chapter 1).

(2) For a period of two (2) years, beginning on January 7, 2025, Respondent is prohibited from serving in any advisory capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as a consultant.

The authority for this notice is 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 46 U.S.C. 70110 (“Maritime Transportation Security Act”), and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1(II) (97.f), Revision No. 01.4. As delegated, 46 U.S.C. 70110(a) authorizes the Coast Guard to impose conditions of entry on vessels arriving in U.S. waters from foreign ports that the Coast Guard has not found to maintain effective anti-terrorism measures. Section 70108, as amended by section 5603 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Pub. L. 118-31, Dec. 22, 2023), states that DHS shall deem any port under the jurisdiction of a foreign government that is a state sponsor of terrorism as not having effective anti-terrorism measures, and immediately apply the sanctions described in 46 U.S.C. 70110(a) to such a port.

In accordance with 46 U.S.C. 70108, as amended, and the Department of State's designation of the Republic of Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, the Coast Guard finds that Cuba does not have effective anti-terrorism measures.

With this notice, the current list of countries assessed and not maintaining effective anti-terrorism measures is as follows: Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Cuba, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Madagascar, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sudan, Syria, Timor-Leste, Venezuela, and Yemen. The current Port Security Advisory is available at: http://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Prevention-Policy-CG-5P/International-Domestic-Port-Assessment/.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has broad authority to control alien travel and to inspect aliens under various provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). 1 Numerous federal statutes require DHS to create an integrated, automated biometric entry-exit system that records the arrival and departure of aliens, compares the biometric data of aliens to verify their identity, and authenticates travel documents presented by such aliens through the comparison of biometrics. 2 Biometrics denotes any physical characteristic or other physical attribute unique to a person that can be used to verify the identity of an individual. 3 This notice applies specifically to biometric facial images.

Various authorities authorize CBP to collect biographic data regarding all travelers entering and departing the United States. See, e.g., INA 211, 215, 231 (8 U.S.C. 1181, 1185, 1221), and Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 71 Public Law 361, sec 433, 46 Stat. 590, 711 (19 U.S.C. 1433). One way that CBP collects this information is through the Form I-94 process (also described as simply “I-94”) discussed below, which CBP requires for certain aliens unless otherwise exempted. 4 Biographic information collected as part of the I-94 process includes, for example, name, date of birth, passport number, passport country of issuance and other personal identifying information.

Further, DHS regulations authorize CBP to collect biometric data from certain aliens seeking admission to the United States. See 8 CFR 215.8. DHS regulations also authorize CBP to collect biometrics from certain aliens upon departure from the United States under pilot programs at land ports and up to 15 air and seaports. See 8 CFR 215.8. 5

Since 2004, CBP has been collecting biometric data from certain aliens arriving in the United States, including taking fingerprints and facial images from certain aliens as part of the I-94 entry process. Currently, CBP issues electronic I-94 forms to all arriving aliens who are legally required to submit that form (unless otherwise exempted) who are admitted or paroled into the United States as evidence of the terms of that person's admission or parole. See 8 CFR 1.4, 235.1(h). Form I-94 is issued at the time the alien is admitted or paroled at a United States port of entry. See 8 CFR 235.1(h). CBP encourages aliens to report their departure to CBP when they exit, so that CBP can record their exit from the United States.

Although CBP routinely collects biometric data from aliens entering the United States, there currently is no comprehensive system in place to collect biometrics from aliens departing the country. Collecting biometrics of certain aliens at both arrival and departure would enable CBP and DHS to have more accurate information regarding whether aliens have departed the country when they are required to depart as well as provide more accurate entry/exit data for such aliens. Further, collecting biometric data will help to reduce visa and travel document fraud and improve CBP's ability to identify criminals and known or suspected terrorists. CBP has been testing various options to collect biometrics at departure in the land and air environments since 2004. 6

At the same time, CBP is also now working to fully automate all I-94 processes. CBP has already automated the I-94 process for air and sea travel with a commercial carrier, such as an airline or cruise ship. CBP obtains the I-94 entry and exit information from the carrier and automatically records that entry and exit information in CBP systems. 7 CBP has also automated the I-94 process for arrival at land border ports of entry. 8 CBP is still in the process of automating the I-94 process on exit at land border ports of entry. CBP issues electronic I-94 forms to certain aliens entering the United States at air, sea, and land border ports of entry. CBP also collects fingerprints or facial image biometrics from travelers subject to I-94 requirements when the traveler arrives in the United States.

As noted above, CBP creates exit records for persons traveling on commercial air or sea carriers using the biographic information provided by the carrier's manifest information as well as carrier-collected biometric information, when available. When exiting the United States at a land border, aliens subject to I-94 requirements are encouraged to report their departure to CBP, so that the agency can record their exit from the United States. If such travelers do not report their departure to CBP, their departure may not be properly recorded, and accordingly, it may appear that such travelers have overstayed their authorized stay. See 8 CFR 235.1(h).

At land ports of entry, CBP does not routinely staff exit lanes nor does CBP have a single process for aliens subject to I-94 requirements to voluntarily report their departure from the United States. Such travelers can currently report their departure by any one of the following means: (1) stopping at a land border port of entry and presenting a printed copy of their electronic I-94 form to a CBP officer; (2) stopping at a land border port of entry and placing a printed copy of their electronic I-94 form in a drop box provided by the port, where available; or (3), if exiting by land on the northern U.S. border, by turning in a printed copy of their electronic I-94 form to the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) when entering Canada (CBSA will then return the form to CBP). 9

The current options in the land environment can be burdensome and, in many cases, impractical or inconvenient due to the location and design of the ports. They also lead to haphazard record keeping and incomplete data collection with respect to travelers leaving the country. Most land border ports of entry provide limited access to the port for vehicles exiting the United States and have minimal parking available to the public. For this reason, most aliens do not report their departure when exiting at land border ports of entry. In those cases, CBP does not collect a record at the time the alien departs the United States. 10 CBP often discovers that an alien has previously left the United States when that same alien attempts to re-enter the United States at a later date. Additionally, CBP generally does not collect biometrics from aliens exiting at land borders, even when an alien properly returns a paper I-94 form.

Captains of pleasure boats are not required to report information regarding persons on the boat to CBP upon departure from the United States. Pilots of private aircraft are required to submit a manifest, but there is limited opportunity to capture travelers' biometrics. Both pleasure boats and private aircraft are permitted to depart the United States from any location, including private property, therefore most of these exits are not reported to CBP.

If successful and implemented on a broader scale, the VSRE Pilot procedures would allow CBP to automate the I-94 process for aliens exiting at land borders and via private conveyances in the air and sea environments and create a biometrically confirmed exit record for those aliens exiting the United States. 11 In addition, there are some occasions where travelers exiting the United States via commercial air or sea may prefer to have proof of their exit on their hand-held device as it would provide an added sense of confidence for some travelers to personally maintain their own records regarding proof of their exit even though CBP obtains proof of exit in these cases from the carriers through required manifest information as well as, in some cases, biometric identity confirmation.

The VSRE Pilot is a voluntary pilot to collect facial images through a mobile application on personal electronic devices from aliens who are subject to I-94 requirements and who are departing the United States. 12 This pilot will help CBP evaluate both: (1) the technology's user-friendliness; and (2) the technology's vulnerabilities with regard to “liveness detection” (whether the technology can correctly determine if the photo taken by the user is a live photo as opposed to a previously uploaded photo) and geolocation (whether the technology can correctly determine whether a person is at least three miles outside of the United States at the time the photo is taken and the exit information is submitted to CBP). 13 The ability to detect liveness and geolocation are crucial to the success of this technology because both factors are needed to confirm that the person claiming to have exited the United States is physically outside of the United States.

This pilot will be one of CBP's critical efforts toward fulfilling DHS's mandate to collect biometric information from departing aliens and CBP's plans to fully automate I-94 information collection. The technology tested during this VSRE Pilot, if successful, will allow CBP to close the information gap on alien entries and exits by making it easier for aliens, specifically aliens subject to I-94 requirements, to report their exit to CBP after their departure from the United States. It will also create a biometrically confirmed, and therefore more accurate, exit record for such aliens leaving the United States.

In this pilot, eligible participants are certain aliens subject to I-94 requirements as described below who may voluntarily submit their facial images using the CBP Home Mobile Application, or any successor mobile application, (CBP Home app) to report their exit from the United States. The CBP Home app is a platform application that can be downloaded and used to access numerous CBP virtual services, which include performing I-94 mobile functions. 14

Participants will use the CBP Home app to provide biographic information from their passport or other travel document (or provide their alien registration number) after exiting the United States. Participants will then use the CBP Home app to take a “selfie” picture after exiting the United States. The CBP Home app will use geolocation services to confirm that the participant is outside the United States, as well as “liveness detection” software to determine that the selfie photo is a live photo, as opposed to a previously uploaded photo. The CBP Home app will then compare the facial image submitted to facial images for that person already retained by CBP in order to confirm the exit biometrically.

CBP will provide information to qualified aliens that explains how to participate in this pilot upon their entry to the United States. Only aliens who are subject to I-94 requirements set forth in 8 CFR 235.1(h) and who exit the United States within the pilot period are eligible to participate in the pilot.

As this pilot is voluntary, CBP will continue to employ the current entry-exit processes described above that do not include the use of the CBP Home app for all travelers, including travelers who choose to participate in the pilot program. 15 Facial images collected during this pilot will be used to confirm biometrically the exits of participating travelers from the United States. A notation that the traveler was biometrically confirmed will become part of the pilot participant's official border-crossing record. However, facial images collected during this pilot will only be kept for one year after completion of the pilot and for analytical purposes only. 16

During this pilot, as well as with the normal process, if a traveler's stay exceeds the period of admission or parole as determined through the regular entry and exit process, the traveler may be subject to grounds of inadmissibility outlined in section 212 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182). CBP will use the VSRE reporting to help reconcile an exit event with the original arrival event. The VSRE exit event, recorded in the Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS)  17 maintained by CBP, will be recorded as a departure. In a case where the CBP Home app malfunctions or fails to complete the process and the VSRE exit event is not recorded properly, the departure record will not be sent or recorded by CBP. Additionally, the CBP Home app will display an error message requesting that the user try to report the exit using the CBP Home app again at a later time and directing the user to www.i94.gov for more information. 18

The app will alert the user that reporting an exit after the traveler's authorized length of stay could result in an incorrectly reported overstay on the user's record; therefore, in those cases, CBP recommends the user not report their exit using the CBP Home app. The user would then either report or not report their exit pursuant to the normal processes. In the event of a CBP Home app error resulting in no reported exit, CBP will not record the departure until CBP receives records from CBSA or until the traveler attempts to reenter the United States at a later date. 19 As noted above, CBP does not currently have an effective method to record traveler exits at land border ports of entry. Therefore, if a voluntary participant is unable to report the participant's exit through the CBP Home app as part of this pilot, the person is in the same position as the person would be if the person chose not to participate in the pilot at all. Inability to use the app or not participating in this pilot program to self-report exit does not create any adverse consequences for alien travelers.

CBP will use facial verification technology to compare a live image (“selfie”) submitted by the participant via the CBP Home app with the photos and biographical information from travelers' document(s)  20 that the agency already stores. The CBP Home app will attempt to match the captured images with travel document source photos of the traveler stored by the agency. 21 CBP will temporarily store all facial images captured during this pilot, as well as previously collected traveler and associated document data for one year from the date of collection. CBP will also store liveness information and geolocation information in a secure, standalone database for one year from the date of collection in order to analyze the liveness detection and geolocation capabilities of the technology. CBP will not distribute any biometric data from the standalone database, except for analysis and reporting purposes on the results of the pilot. Data saved for analytical purposes will not contain any personally identifiable information. The traveler's biographic and validated departure date is sent to TECS and ADIS and will be retained according to those system's retention policy.

Participation in the pilot is voluntary. All aliens in possession of an I-94, exiting the United States may participate by downloading the CBP Home app and providing the required biometrics and other information to CBP. Individuals who choose not to participate should use the current I-94 exit process.

This voluntary pilot will begin on March 19, 2025 and will run for two years. Any extensions of this pilot program will be announced by a notice published in the Federal Register . 22

CBP will retain the liveness detection results and the selfie photograph from participants for one year after the completion of the pilot. CBP will store the liveness detection results and the selfie in a secure CBP database for analytical purposes. CBP will retain the geolocation information data provided by pilot participants through the CBP Home app in the CBP I-94/Exit database for one year after completion of the pilot and will use the data for analytical purposes only.

CBP will analyze the results of this pilot to assess the operational feasibility of using facial verification and geolocation to confirm the exit of aliens subject to I-94 requirements. CBP will evaluate the pilot based on several criteria, including:

• the technology's user-friendliness;

• the technology's vulnerabilities with regard to “liveness detection” (whether the technology can correctly determine if the photo taken by the user is a live photo as opposed to a previously uploaded photo); and

• the technology's vulnerabilities with regard to geolocation (whether the technology can correctly determine whether a person is at least three miles outside of the United States at the time the photo is taken and the exit information is submitted to CBP through the CBP Home app).

CBP will ensure that all Privacy Act requirements and applicable DHS privacy policies are adhered to during this pilot. 23 CBP will issue a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) Appendix update to the DHS/CBP/PIA-068 CBP Home Mobile Application to provide transparency on the use of the CBP Home mobile application to self-report a departure from the United States. 24 CBP will ensure compliance with Privacy Act protections and DHS privacy policies, including DHS's Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs). The FIPPs account for the nature and purpose of the information being collected in relation to DHS's mission to preserve, protect and secure the United States. The PIA addresses issues such as the security, integrity, and sharing of data, use limitation and transparency.

CBP has also issued System of Records Notices (SORN(s)) that fully encompass all the data that will be collected for the purposes of this pilot, including: DHS/CBP-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of Records, 81 FR 89957 (Dec. 13, 2016); DHS/CBP-021 Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS), 80 FR 72081 (Nov. 8, 2015); and DHS/CBP-016 Nonimmigrant Information System, 80 FR 13398 (Mar. 13, 2015). 25

The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that CBP consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public. An agency may not conduct, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget. This information collection is covered by OMB control numbers 1651-0111 and 1651-0138. These information collections have been updated to include information collected by CBP pursuant to this notice.

Pete Flores, Acting Commissioner, having reviewed and approved this document, has delegated the authority to electronically sign this document to the Director of the Regulations and Disclosure Law Division for CBP, for purposes of publication in the Federal Register .

TSA published a Federal Register notice, with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments, of the following collection of information on October 4, 2024, 89 FR 80911. TSA did not receive any comments on the notice.

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.

Title: Airport Security Part 1542.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

OMB Control Number: 1652-0002.

Forms(s): NA.

Affected Public: Airport operators.

Abstract: The information collection is used to determine compliance with 49 CFR part 1542 and to ensure passenger safety and security by ensuring compliance with airport operator required security procedures. The following information collections and other recordkeeping requirements with which respondent covered airport operators must comply fall under this OMB control number: (1) development of an Airport Security Program (ASP), submission to TSA for review and approval, and implementation; (2) as applicable, development of airport operator-requested or TSA-required ASP amendments and temporary changed conditions, submission to TSA for review and approval, and implementation; (3) collection of data necessary to complete a criminal history records check for those individuals with unescorted access authority to a Security Identification Display Area; (4) submission to TSA of identifying information about individuals to whom the airport operator has issued identification media, such as name, address, and country of birth, in order for TSA to conduct a Security Threat Assessment; and (5) information collection and recordkeeping requirements associated with airport operator compliance with regulations, employees who have access privileges to secured areas of the airport, and compliance with Security Directives issued pursuant to the regulation.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 435.

Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 2,142,174. 1

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 Burke Museum, 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 unassociated funerary object is a ceramic vessel (Burke Cat. 1965-4/1). The vessel was collected by W.L. Phillips in 1926 from the Gulf Coast, possibly in Mississippi. The vessel was eventually obtained by Floyd Baldwin who then donated it to the Burke Museum in 1965. Baldwin provided a note from W.L. Phillips that stated the vessel was from the “Choctaw Indians” and had been exposed due to a hurricane in 1926, which eroded burial sites along river banks. Phillips provided one photograph of the burial site where he found the vessel, which included human remains. There is no information about whether Phillips collected any other burial material or human remains from this site. There is no documentation that indicates the vessel has been treated with hazardous substances; however, it has not been tested for hazardous contamination.

The Burke Museum has determined that:

• The one unassociated funerary object described in this notice is reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near human remains, and is connected, either at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony of a Native American culture according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization. The unassociated funerary object has been identified by a preponderance of the evidence as related to human remains, specific individuals, or families, or removed from a specific burial site or burial area of an individual or individuals with cultural affiliation to an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural item described in this notice and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice must be sent to the authorized representative identified in this notice under 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 April 18, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Burke Museum 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 Burke Museum 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 Denver Art Museum, 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 with two distinct pieces has been requested for repatriation. The object of cultural patrimony is a screen with two sections, both sections are made of wood and the culturally significant motifs of ravens are painted on them. The raven motif signals a clan house within the Tlingit community of Sitka Alaska. Because of the motif, we will refer to these two screens, which together form one object, as the Raven Screen throughout this notice. The Raven Screen was obtained by the Denver Art Museum's curator of Native Arts, Mr. Frederick Douglas from Mr. Henry Moses in 1939 through intermediary George Emmons with the intention of exhibiting the screen at the San Francisco World's Fair. Henry Moses was a fur trader living in Hoonah, Alaska who collected other items from this community as well. To our knowledge, Moses was not Indigenous, nor was he a member of a clan or moiety affiliated with these screens and thus would have had no right to possess or sell these items, which were normally passed down generationally within the community through systems of inheritance under Tlingit customary law. It is documented, through photography, that these screens were once positioned on a clan house in Sitka, Alaska and were important to the shared cultural heritage of the Tlingit community living there. As a matrilineal society, screens such as these should pass down to a nephew of the family's matriarch. However, the heritage rights of Alaskan Native communities came into conflict with the Western legal system, which forced many families to relinquish their inherited rights of possession and lose ownership of their properties and any items associated with them. Henry Moses acquired these items from yet another person who is not specified in our records, but it is clear that at the time these screens were separated from the original knowledge keepers and rightful owners of this property, and at the time they fell into the hands of the unidentified person, the United States Government had so undermined the traditional inheritance systems and enacted measures of such extreme assimilation as to guarantee that these screens were relinquished or abandoned under a situation of extreme duress.

The Denver Art Museum has determined that:

• The Raven Screen is an object of cultural patrimony and as described in this notice 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), according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribe who have upon multiple consultations alerted the DAM to the screen's ongoing cultural significance and their importance in ensuring cultural knowledge persists into the future.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice must be sent to the authorized representative identified in this notice under 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 April 18, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Denver Art Museum 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 Denver Art Museum 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 Coronado National Forest, and additional information on the human remains or cultural items in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the identifications in this notice.

The 47 objects of cultural patrimony are ceramic sherds. Eight of the sherds are Mimbres Classic Black-on-white, two sherds are corrugated brownwares, eight sherds are undecorated whitewares, and 29 sherds are undecorated brownwares or buffwares. These materials were gathered from Forest Service site number AR03-05-04-101. This site is informally known as Hawk Peak Shrine. AR03-05-04-101 contains an oval hole surrounded by a rock ring and cairn and is interpreted to be a shrine associated with Mogollon use of the area. This site is located on the summit of a high-altitude peak in the Pinaleño Mountains, approximately 13 miles southwest of Safford, Arizona. The site is located on lands administered by the Coronado National Forest, in the Safford Vista Ranger District within Graham County, Arizona. On May 23, 2000, four ceramics were gathered from the surface of AR03-05-04-101. In addition to material gathered in 2000, ceramics associated with the site were gathered on October 20, 1987.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, two individuals have been reasonably identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The two individuals were identified in faunal collections at the Arizona State Museum (ASM) associated with Forest Service site number AR03-05-05-213. This site is informally known as the Romero Site because of the Historic occupation of the Romero Family ca. 1844. The site is also a large Hohokam site with an occupation dating from A.D. 425 to A.D. 1450. The site is located on lands administered by the Coronado National Forest, Santa Catalina Ranger District and permitted to the State of Arizona for Catalina State Park. The site location is in Pima County, AZ.

In 1987, the Institute for American Research (Desert Archaeology) conducted an archaeological collection survey in Catalina State Park, focusing on the site. All artifacts, reports, and photo material were curated at ASM. Additional test excavations were conducted in 1990 and 1993 and all archaeological material was curated at ASM. This collection went through repatriation and disposition by ASM to the Tohono O'odham Nation on behalf of Coronado National Forest in 2009 (ASM #r DP-2009-7). Subsequently, in 2016 ASM conducted a review of the faunal remains from the excavations. The human remains of two individuals were identified in these collections.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, two individuals have been reasonably identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The 4,707 unassociated funerary objects are 4,232 ceramics, 457 pieces of flaked stone, four groundstone fragments, and 14 faunal remains. The two individuals were identified during efforts to restore and stabilize unauthorized excavations at Forest Service site number AR03-05-05-213. This site is informally known as the Romero Site because of the Historic occupation of the Romero Family ca. 1844. The site is also a large Hohokam site with an occupation dating from A.D. 425 to A.D. 1450. The site is located on lands administered by the Coronado National Forest, Santa Catalina Ranger District and permitted to the State of Arizona for Catalina State Park. The site location is in Pima County, AZ.

The project included the restoration of up to six unauthorized excavations, here referred to as “pits.” The excavations were conducted in accordance with the requirements of an ARPA permit issued by Coronado National Forest to Archaeology Southwest pursuant to the Archaeological Resources Protection Act. On Wednesday April 13, 2022, a team of archaeologists from Archaeology Southwest and Gila River Indian Community excavated the back dirt pile from one pit. The back dirt was screened for artifacts, and large rocks were set aside for later volumetric computation, to be returned to the pit during final backfill and stabilization. Nearly all the back dirt pile had been processed when human remains of what is likely an individual of Native American heritage were found. As per the Forest Service protocol for inadvertent discoveries, all work was stopped at the location and the area was secured with a tarp and large rocks. The team moved to another pit and began the same work processing the back dirt pile. The work continued the following day April 14th and again, the back dirt pile was nearly processed when human remains of what is likely an individual of Native American heritage were found. Again, work was stopped, and the area was secured. Dr. James Watson of the Arizona State Museum confirmed the remains are consistent with human.

The 436 objects of cultural patrimony are 392 ceramics, one flake, one hammerstone, one deer tooth fragment, one piece of worked wood, six tobacco twigs, one twig segment, nine cane tubes, one saltpeter crystal, two stone mosaic pieces, three shell disk beads, two stone disk beads, 10 turquoise disk beads, one turquoise pendant, one piece of unworked turquoise, and four charcoal samples. Many of the ceramics are sherd disks or modified into secondary vessels. These materials were gathered from Forest Service site number AR03-05-03-78. This site is informally known as Red Cave. The site is located within a large cave in the Whetstone Mountains, approximately 13 miles southwest of Benson, Arizona. The site is located on lands administered by the Coronado National Forest, in the Sierra Vista Ranger District within Pima County, Arizona.

AR03-05-03-78 contains a water-filled basin where much of the gathered material was deposited. The site is interpreted to be a shrine. The large number of Middle Rincon and Late Rincon red-on-brown pottery suggests the site was used by the Hohokam from A.D. 1000 to A.D. 1150. On February 26, 1993, 16 objects were gathered from AR03-05-03-78: one sherd disk, one unworked sherd, one flake, one hammerstone, three cane tubes, one twig, six tobacco stems, one piece of worked wood, and one piece of charcoal. The tobacco is associated with the cane tube. In addition to material gathered in 1993, sherd disks and other modified sherds, wood fragments, cane tubes, saltpeter, and shell and turquoise beads were collected, totaling 420 objects, between March 18, 1973 and August 8, 1990.

The Coronado National Forest has determined that:

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

• The 4,707 unassociated funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near human remains, and are connected, either at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony of a Native American culture according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization. The unassociated funerary objects have been identified by a preponderance of the evidence as related to human remains, specific individuals, or families, or removed from a specific burial site or burial area of an individual or individuals with cultural affiliation to an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• The 483 objects of cultural patrimony 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), according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• The Ak-Chin Indian Community; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona and the Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona have priority for disposition of the human remains or cultural item described in this notice.

Written claims for disposition of the human remains or cultural items in this notice must be sent to the appropriate official identified in this notice under ADDRESSES . If no claim for disposition is received by March 19, 2026, the human remains or cultural items in this notice will become unclaimed human remains or cultural items. Claims for disposition may be submitted by:

1. Any lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization 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 they have priority for disposition.

Disposition of the human remains or cultural items in this notice may occur on or after April 18, 2025. If competing claims for disposition are received, the Coronado National Forest must determine the most appropriate claimant prior to disposition. Requests for joint disposition of the human remains or cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Coronado National Forest is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the lineal descendants, 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. 3002, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.7.

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, 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 minimum, one individual was collected at the Uintah and Ouray Agency, Uintah County, UT. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 37 years old and identified as “Ute.” H.M. Tidwell took the hair clippings at the Uintah and Ouray Agency between 1930 and 1933. Tidwell sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at minimum, six individuals were collected at the Sherman Institute, Riverside County, CA. The human remains are hair clippings collected from three individuals who were recorded as being 21 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 18 years old, one individual recorded as being 16 years old, and one individual with an unknown age and identified as “Ute.” 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.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was collected at the University of New Mexico, Alburquerque County, NM. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 14 years old and identified as “Ute.” Dr. Clyde Kay Maben Kluckhohn took the hair clippings at the University of New Mexico between 1930 and 1933. Kluckhohn sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was collected at the U.S. Indian Vocational School, Alburquerque County, NM. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 15 years old and identified as “Ute.” Reuben Perry took the hair clippings at the U.S. Indian Vocational School between 1930 and 1933. Perry sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Based on the available information and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is clearly identified by the information available about the human remains described in this notice.

The PMAE has determined that:

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

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado; Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation, Utah; and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after April 18, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.

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

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 University of California, Berkeley 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 32 cultural items have been requested for repatriation.

In 1940, Francis A. Riddell and Harry Starr Riddell Jr. collected two lots of unassociated funerary objects from CA-SAC-166 in Sacramento County, CA. These unassociated funerary objects are ground stone. Francis A. Riddell donated these unassociated funerary objects to the Lowie Museum (today the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology) in 1951.

In 1952, Robert Fleming Heizer removed one lot of unassociated funerary objects from CA-SAC-166. The unassociated funerary object is a core. In May 1952, the Lowie Museum appropriated the unassociated funerary object from the University of California Archaeological Survey. Robert Fleming Heizer and Albert B. Elsasser removed four lots of unassociated funerary objects from CA-SAC-166 in June 1953.

In July 1953, the Lowie Museum appropriated these four unassociated funerary objects from the University of California Archaeological Survey via Albert B. Elsasser. The four lots of unassociated funerary objects are stone tools and lithics.

In October 1946, numerous individuals removed 16 lots of unassociated funerary objects from CA-SAC-172 in Sacramento County, CA. On September 12, 1952 the Lowie Museum appropriated the 16 lots of unassociated funerary objects from the University of California Archaeological Survey via Albert B. Elsasser. The 16 lots of unassociated funerary objects are baked clay, beads, ocher, stone tools, and shell ornaments.

In 1932, Jeremiah B. Lillard (Sacramento County Board of Education), collected one lot of unassociated funerary objects from Del Paso Mound, Sacramento County, California. The one lot of unassociated funerary objects are beads. The University of California Museum of Anthropology (today the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology) accessioned the one lot of unassociated funerary objects in 1942.

Between 1932 and 1937, four lots of unassociated funerary objects were removed from the area of Fair Oaks, Sacramento County, California. The four lots of unassociated funerary objects are ground stone, projectile points, and discoidal. In 1942, Jeremiah B. Lillard (Sacramento County Board of Education) donated the four lots of unassociated funerary objects to the University of California Museum of Anthropology (today the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology).

In 1937, Francis A. Riddell removed one lot of unassociated funerary objects from the Folsom area of Sacramento County, California. The one lot of unassociated funerary objects are beads. Francis A. Riddell donated the 3 lots of unassociated funerary objects to the University of California Museum of Anthropology in 1949.

In 1932, two lots of unassociated funerary objects were removed from Folsom, Sacramento County, California and donated to the University of California Museum of Anthropology (today the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology) by Jeremiah B. Lillard (Sacramento County Board of Education) in 1942. The two lots of unassociated funerary objects are ground stone.

In 1922 Hermann R. Steinbach removed one lot of unassociated funerary objects from Natomas Mound, Sacramento County, California. The one lot of unassociated funerary objects are beads. Jesse Peter donated the one lot of unassociated funerary objects to the University of California, Berkeley in 1922.

Collections and collection spaces at the Phoebe A Hearst Museum of Anthropology were treated with substances for preservation and pest control, some potentially hazardous. No records have been found to date at the Museum to indicate whether or not chemicals or natural substances were used prior to 1960.

The University of California, Berkeley has determined that:

• The 32 unassociated funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near human remains, and are connected, either at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony of a Native American culture according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization. The unassociated funerary objects have been identified by a preponderance of the evidence as related to human remains, specific individuals, or families, or removed from a specific burial site or burial area of an individual or individuals with cultural affiliation to an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Tract), California.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the authorized representative identified in this notice under 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 April 18, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of California, Berkeley 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 California, Berkeley 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.