The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to protect the health of livestock, including poultry, in the United States by preventing the introduction and interstate spread of serious diseases and pests of livestock, and for eradicating such diseases within the United States when feasible (7 U.S.C. 8301-8322). This authority has been delegated to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Veterinary Services (VS).

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) is one such serious disease of livestock. In February of 2004, the first outbreak of HPAI in the United States in 20 years occurred in Texas. Since then, HPAI outbreaks in poultry have continued to occur across the United States and impact commercial poultry facilities and backyard flocks.

USDA APHIS VS works closely with States, Tribes, and the poultry industry to prevent HPAI from becoming established in the U.S. poultry population. Once established, HPAI rapidly spreads within and between flocks and can cause severe, painful conditions, including hemorrhaging and neurologic conditions, widespread organ failure, and high mortality. Keeping our nation's poultry operations free from HPAI helps protect the poultry industry, farmers' livelihoods, the availability of poultry and poultry products for U.S. consumers, international trade, the health of wild birds, and the health of people who are in close, regular contact with poultry. While HPAI is extremely infectious and fatal in poultry, the risks from HPAI infections to humans are low.

USDA APHIS VS has prepared a programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS) to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with action alternatives that could be taken during an HPAI outbreak in poultry in the United States. The chosen alternative must (1) detect, control, and contain HPAI in poultry as quickly as possible; (2) eradicate the HPAI virus using strategies that protect public health and the environment, and stabilize animal agriculture, the food supply, and the economy; and (3) provide science- and risk-based approaches and systems to facilitate continuity of business for non-infected animals and non-contaminated animal products. The findings of the programmatic EIS will be used to support HPAI outbreak response activity planning and decision-making and enhance the decisionmakers' ability to protect the environment and human health when an HPAI outbreak occurs. USDA APHIS VS may use information presented in this EIS to promptly fulfill its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) obligations and any future, relevant site-specific NEPA documents may tier to it. The EIS also informs the public about the potential environmental effects of HPAI outbreak response activities.

The final programmatic EIS presents the purpose and need for the action, a description of the affected environment, and an analysis of potential environmental impacts of three alternative actions: (1) No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative; (2) Federal Operational Assistance (No Action) Alternative; and (3) Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative (Preferred Alternative).

Under the No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative, State and local authorities, Tribes, and poultry owners and producers would be responsible for depopulating HPAI-infected flocks, disposing of carcasses and other potentially HPAI-contaminated materials, and managing any necessary transportation, cleanup and disinfection. USDA APHIS VS would not be involved in managing, overseeing, and/or actively implementing any of these operational activities. State authorities, Tribes, and poultry owners and producers would make all the decisions regarding the depopulation and carcass disposal methods chosen for implementation. Upon request from the States, Tribes, or poultry owners and producers, USDA APHIS VS would provide technical guidance ( e.g., recommendations, issuance of guidance documents) about surveillance testing to owners and producers of commercial and backyard flocks that are not experiencing signs of clinical illness to determine if infections of the virus have occurred. USDA APHIS VS may provide indemnity and/or financial compensation.

Under the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative, USDA APHIS VS would conduct all activities as described under the No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative. In addition, upon request from State, local, or Tribal authorities, USDA APHIS VS would provide operational assistance through managing, overseeing, and/or actively participating in depopulation, carcass disposal, and transportation. Cleaning and disinfection would be the responsibility of States, Tribes, and poultry owners and producers, as USDA APHIS VS does not perform these activities. USDA APHIS VS would also provide tools upon request, such as machinery and contracted operators, for depopulation and disposal activities. The level of assistance USDA APHIS VS would provide will depend on the needs of the impacted State or Tribe.

Under the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative (Preferred Alternative), USDA APHIS VS would provide all the same support and assistance described under the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative. In addition, USDA APHIS VS would condition a poultry producer's eligibility for indemnity and/or compensation on that producer's ability to demonstrate compliance with their existing site-specific written biosecurity plan. USDA APHIS VS would require producers to pass one type of biosecurity audit for premises that were previously HPAI-infected that intend to restock and wish to be eligible to receive subsequent payments of indemnity for the restocked poultry during an outbreak. USDA APHIS VS would require producers to pass another type of biosecurity audit for premises located in the buffer zone of a control area prior to movement of poultry onto the premises if the premises wishes to be eligible for indemnity for poultry that have been moved onto the premises in the event of an outbreak. The buffer zone, which undergoes periodic surveillance, is an uninfected area typically extending 3 to 10 kilometers (1.9 to 6.2 miles) around an affected premises. If poultry owners or producers do not pass the required biosecurity audit and choose to restock a previously infected premises or move poultry onto a premises in a buffer zone, they would not receive indemnity and/or compensation if the premises became infected or reinfected with HPAI. Additionally, USDA APHIS VS would not pay indemnity for flocks moved onto premises in active infected zones if the flocks become infected with HPAI within 14 days following the end of the control area around an infected premises. A producer who does not make corrections recommended in APHIS' biosecurity audit will not be eligible for indemnity payments if the premises experiences future infections within the same outbreak.

The potential environmental impacts on the following resources are considered in the final EIS: Soil, air, and water quality; vegetation health; humans (including effects on health and safety, the economy, socioeconomic considerations, cultural and historic resources, children's health, and Tribes); wildlife health, and other wildlife considerations including birds of conservation concern, eagles, and threatened and endangered species. The final EIS also considers the impacts of HPAI outbreak response activities on climate change, the impacts of climate change on HPAI outbreak response activities, and the cumulative impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future related actions. The primary HPAI outbreak response activities that are the focus of the impacts section under each alternative are depopulation and disposal, as well as some discussion concerning transportation and cleaning and disinfection.

In general, comparing the potential environmental impacts of the three alternatives, the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative is expected to result in the least environmental impacts, followed by the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative while the No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative is expected to result in the most environmental impacts.

Direct assistance from USDA APHIS VS under both the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative and the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative would mean an additional level of expertise when making decisions and implementing actions, which is lacking in the No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative. With Federal, State, and local authorities, Tribes, and poultry owners and producers all working together, it is more likely that the disease will be eradicated as rapidly as possible. A rigorous Federal response should incentivize the rapid reporting of HPAI incidents because it achieves disease eradication while providing relief to the poultry owners and producers. Additionally, absent Federal assistance, States and Tribes may lack the resources to deal with the outbreaks in a timely manner. The benefit of completing HPAI virus eradication activities as fast as possible is that it would decrease the risk of HPAI spreading to nearby premises or to wild birds that may infect other flocks, thereby preventing additional environmental impacts from future HPAI outbreaks and HPAI outbreak response activities. Under both the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative and the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative, poultry suffering from HPAI should be minimized due to effective and efficient depopulation procedures being implemented with USDA APHIS VS assistance. Additionally, the assistance of USDA APHIS VS under the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative and the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative is expected to allow poultry owners and producers to resume business as rapidly as possible and likely more rapidly than under the No Federal Operational Assistance Alternative.

However, comparing the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative to the Federal Operational Assistance Alternative, the greatest reduction in impacts of all the alternatives is expected under the Federal Operational Assistance with Biosecurity Incentive Alternative. Requiring certain biosecurity measures ( i.e., audits) as part of the outbreak response to receive indemnity and/or compensation may increase the chance of biosecurity measures being implemented by commercial poultry owners and producers. Under this alternative, increased biosecurity measures could decrease the chance of reintroductions at the outbreak site or at surrounding premises resulting in a decrease in not only the spread of HPAI during an ongoing outbreak, but a decrease in future HPAI outbreak response activities and their potential impacts over time.

Based on the final programmatic EIS, USDA APHIS VS has concluded that the three alternatives will have minor potential impacts on soil, air, water quality, vegetation health, and cultural and historical resources, if all appropriate Federal, State, and local laws and guidance are followed. Currently, the risk of HPAI infections to humans is low, with risks of injuries and psychological trauma to workers being a concern that is minimized by following appropriate guidelines. Overall, potential economic impacts from HPAI are expected to be reduced under each of the alternatives. Socioeconomic impacts are possible under all alternatives and authorities should work to identify ways to limit those impacts. Children must have limited access to locations where HPAI outbreak response activities are being conducted, whenever possible. Tribes may choose to implement HPAI outbreak responses on their own; when USDA APHIS VS assists, there may be a decrease in impacts from HPAI outbreak response activities. Potential risks to wildlife health are expected to be reduced under the three alternatives. Under all alternatives, potential impacts to climate change would be relative to the biomass of poultry depopulated and carcasses disposed of, and the depopulation, disposal, and sanitation methods used. Lastly, following best management practices and enhanced biosecurity measures over time reduces the likelihood of cumulative impacts.

The final programmatic EIS was prepared in accordance with: (1) the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), (2) the Council on Environmental Quality's NEPA-implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), compliant with the April 2022 regulations that went into effect on May 20, 2022, (3) USDA's NEPA-implementing regulations (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) USDA APHIS' NEPA-Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).

After the 30-day review period ends, we will issue a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD will explain the agency's decision, redescribe the alternatives considered, and discuss any plans for mitigation.

I. Abstract

The National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses, which is sponsored by the National Center for Health Workforce Analysis (NCHWA) under the Health Resources Services Administration (HRSA) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is conducted to assist in fulfilling the Congressional mandates of the Public Health Service Act. Under 42 U.S.C. 294n(b)(2)(A), the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) must establish a National Center for Health Workforce Analysis responsible for the development of information describing and analyzing the health care workforce and workforce-related issues, as well as to provide necessary information for decision-making regarding future directions in health professions and nursing programs in response to societal and professional needs. Additionally, 42 U.S.C 295k(a)-(b) requires the Secretary to establish “a program, including a uniform health professions data reporting system, to collect, compile, and analyze data on health professions personnel” which may be expanded to include, whenever determined necessary by the Secretary, “the collection, compilation, and analysis of data . . . health care administration personnel, nurses, allied health personnel . . . in States designated by the Secretary to be included in the program.” The NSSRN is designed to obtain the necessary data to determine the characteristics and distribution of Registered Nurses (RNs) throughout the United States, as well as emerging patters in their employment characteristics. These data will provide the means for the evaluation and assessment of these evolving characteristics, educational qualifications, and career employment patterns of RNs, consistent with the goals of congressional mandates of the Public Health Service Act found in 42 U.S.C. 294n(b)(2)(A) and 295k(a)-(b). Such data is particularly important to understand workforce issues faced by Registered Nurses given the dynamic change in the RN population and the transformation of the healthcare system in recent years.

NSSRN is seeking clearance to make the following changes:

• Revised questionnaire content—there are modifications to the questionnaire which include removing items, modifying existing items, and adding new content for the 2026 NSSRN. Questionnaire relating to the coronavirus pandemic have been removed, as have redundant and unneeded open-ended response options. Explanatory help text is added where needed. Additional questions related to teaching/precepting nurses and nursing burnout are added for 2026. New content has been cognitively tested. The final set of proposed new and modified content will be included in the full OMB ICR for the 2026 NSSRN.

From the prior cycle of the NSSRN, using American Association for Public Opinion Research definitions of response, we expect the 2026 NSSR to achieve a 50% response rate.

All 125,000 RNs will receive an initial invitation letter with instructions on how to complete the questionnaire via the web. Ninety percent of the sampled RNs will receive a $5 unconditional monetary incentive with the initial invitation. No additional incentives are planned for subsequent follow-up mailings.

Following the initial invitation letter, two additional web invitations, two reminder pressure sealed postcards, and one paper questionnaire mailing will be sent. Similar to previous rounds of the survey, the 2026 NSSRN will employ a Telephone Questionnaire Assistance (TQA) line. TQA staff will not only be able to answer respondent questions and concerns regarding the survey but will also be able to collect survey responses over the telephone using administrative access to the web instrument per respondent request.

OMB Control Number: 0607-1002.

Form Number(s): NSSRN.

Type of Review: Regular submission, Request for a Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

Affected Public: Nursing populations, researchers, policy makers.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 62,500.

Estimated Time per Response: 30 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 31,250.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Legal Authority: Census Authority: 13 U.S.C 8(b).

HRSA Authority: Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 294n(b)(2)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 295k(a)-(b).

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

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

On December 11, 2008, Commerce published in the Federal Register the AD orders on imports of uncovered innerspring units from South Africa and Vietnam and, on February 19, 2009, Commerce published an AD order on imports of uncovered innerspring units from China. 1 On September 3, 2024, the ITC instituted, 2 and Commerce initiated, 3 the third sunset review of the Orders, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). As a result of its reviews, Commerce determined that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping, and therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins of dumping likely to prevail should the Orders be revoked. 4

On April 3, 2025, the ITC published its determination, pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752(a) of the Act, that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. 5

The merchandise subject to the Orders is uncovered innerspring units composed of a series of individual metal springs joined together in sizes corresponding to the sizes of adult mattresses ( e.g., twin, twin long, full, full long, queen, California king, and king) and units used in smaller constructions, such as crib and youth mattresses. All uncovered innerspring units are included in the scope regardless of width and length. Included within this definition are innersprings typically ranging from 30.5 inches to 76 inches in width and 68 inches to 84 inches in length. Innersprings for crib mattresses typically range from 25 inches to 27 inches in width and 50 inches to 52 inches in length.

Uncovered innerspring units are suitable for use as the innerspring component in the manufacture of innerspring mattresses, including mattresses that incorporate a foam encasement around the innerspring.

Pocketed and non-pocketed innerspring units are included in this definition. Non-pocketed innersprings are typically joined together with helical wire and border rods. Non-pocketed innersprings are included in this definition regardless of whether they have border rods attached to the perimeter of the innerspring. Pocketed innersprings are individual coils covered by a “pocket” or “sock” of a nonwoven synthetic material or woven material and then glued together in a linear fashion.

Uncovered innersprings are classified under subheading 9404.29.9010 and have also been classified under subheadings 9404.10.0000, 9404.29.9005, 9404.29.9011, 7326.20.0070, 7326.20.0090, 7320.20.5010, 7320.90.5010, or 7326.20.0071 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description of the scope of the Orders is dispositive.

As a result of the determinations by Commerce and the ITC that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, Commerce hereby orders the continuation of the Orders. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect AD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise.

The effective date of the continuation of the Orders will be April 3, 2025. 6 Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c)(2), Commerce intends to initiate the next five-year reviews of the Orders not later than 30 days prior to fifth anniversary of the date of the last determination by the ITC.

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

These five-year (sunset) reviews and this notice are in accordance with sections 751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act and published in accordance with section 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

On April 18, 1996, Commerce initiated an AD investigation to determine whether imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 1 On May 16, 1996, the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) notified Commerce of its affirmative preliminary injury determination.

On October 10, 1996, Commerce and certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico initialed a proposed agreement to suspend the AD investigation. On October 28, 1996, Commerce determined imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico were being sold at LTFV in the United States. 2 On the same day, Commerce and certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed an agreement to suspend the investigation (1996 Suspension Agreement). 3

On May 31, 2002, certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States from Mexico provided written notice to Commerce of their withdrawal from the 1996 Suspension Agreement, effective on July 30, 2002. Because the 1996 Suspension Agreement would no longer cover substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico, effective July 30, 2002, Commerce terminated the 1996 Suspension Agreement, terminated the sunset review of the suspended investigation, and resumed the antidumping investigation. 4

On November 8, 2002, Commerce and certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico initialed a proposed agreement suspending the resumed AD investigation on imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. On December 4, 2002, Commerce and certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed a new suspension agreement (2002 Suspension Agreement). 5

On November 26, 2007, certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States provided written notice to Commerce of their withdrawal from the 2002 Suspension Agreement, effective 90 days from the date of their withdrawal letter ( i.e., February 24, 2008), or earlier, at Commerce's discretion. On November 28, 2007, Commerce and certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico initialed a new proposed agreement to suspend the AD investigation on imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. On December 3, 2007, Commerce released the initialed agreement to interested parties for comment.

Because the 2002 Suspension Agreement would no longer cover substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico, Commerce published a notice of intent to terminate the 2002 Suspension Agreement, intent to terminate the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and intent to resume the AD investigation. 6 On January 16, 2008, Commerce published a notice of termination of the 2002 Suspension Agreement, termination of the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and resumption of the AD investigation, effective January 18, 2008. 7 On January 22, 2008, Commerce signed a new suspension agreement (2008 Suspension Agreement) with certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. 8

On August 15, 2012, certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico filed a letter with Commerce requesting consultations under Section IV.G. of the 2008 Suspension Agreement, and Commerce agreed to consult. As a result of these consultations, on February 2, 2013, Commerce and tomato growers/exporters from Mexico accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imports from Mexico initialed a draft agreement. On February 8, 2013, Commerce published a notice of intent to terminate the 2008 Suspension Agreement, intent to terminate the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and intent to resume the AD investigation. 9 On March 1, 2013, Commerce issued a notice of termination of the 2008 Suspension Agreement, termination of the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and resumption of the AD investigation. 10 On March 4, 2013, Commerce and certain tomato growers/exporters from Mexico signed a new suspension agreement (2013 Suspension Agreement). 11

On November 14, 2018, the Florida Tomato Exchange (FTE), a member of the U.S. petitioning industry, requested that Commerce terminate the 2013 Suspension Agreement and resume the underlying AD investigation. On February 6, 2019, Commerce notified Mexican signatories that Commerce intended to withdraw from the 2013 Suspension Agreement, rescind the sunset and administrative reviews, and resume the underlying AD investigation. 12 On May 7, 2019, Commerce withdrew from the 2013 Suspension Agreement and issued a notice of termination of the 2013 Suspension Agreement, rescission of the administrative review, and resumption of the underlying AD investigation. 13

On August 20, 2019, Commerce and a representative of Mexican producers/exporters initialed a draft agreement to suspend the AD investigation and invited interested parties to comment. 14 On September 19, 2019, Commerce and representatives of the signatory producers/exporters accounting for substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed the 2019 Agreement. 15

On October 11, 2019, the FTE requested continuation of the underlying AD investigation in accordance with section 734(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.208(h). 16 On October 25, 2019, Commerce issued its final determination that fresh tomatoes from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold at LTFV in the United States. 17 On December 12, 2019, the ITC issued its final determination that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. 18

On August 1, 2024, Commerce initiated a five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation. 19

On June 16, 2023, the FTE filed a request that Commerce terminate the 2019 Agreement and institute an AD order in accordance with the affirmative final determinations of Commerce and the ITC. 20

On December 4, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register the final results of the five-year expedited sunset review of the suspended investigation. Commerce preliminarily found dumping was likely to continue or recur at weighted-average margins up to 30.48 percent. 21 The ITC is currently conducting a full five-year sunset review. 22

The merchandise subject to this 2019 Agreement is all fresh or chilled tomatoes (fresh tomatoes) which have Mexico as their origin, except for those tomatoes which are for processing. For purposes of this 2019 Agreement, processing is defined to include preserving by any commercial process, such as canning, dehydrating, drying, or the addition of chemical substances, or converting the tomato product into juices, sauces, or purees. In Appendix F of this 2019 Agreement, Commerce has outlined the procedure that Signatories must follow for selling subject merchandise for processing. Fresh tomatoes that are imported for cutting up, not further processing ( e.g., tomatoes used in the preparation of fresh salsa or salad bars), are covered by this 2019 Agreement.

Commercially grown tomatoes, both for the fresh market and for processing, are classified as Lycopersicon esculentum. Important commercial varieties of fresh tomatoes include common round, cherry, grape, plum, greenhouse, and pear tomatoes, all of which are covered by this Agreement.

Tomatoes imported from Mexico covered by this 2019 Agreement are classified under the following subheading of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS), according to the season of importation: 0702. Although this HTSUS number is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this 2019 Agreement is dispositive.

On April 14, 2025, Commerce notified all Mexican Signatory producers/exporters of its intent to exercise its option under Section XI.B of the 2019 Agreement to withdraw from the 2019 Agreement. In accordance with Section XI.B of the 2019 Agreement, Commerce's withdrawal from the 2019 Agreement shall be effective on July 14, 2025, which is 90 days after such notice. 23 On July 14, 2025, Commerce intends to terminate the 2019 Agreement and issue an AD order, in accordance with section 734(i)(1)(C) of the Act. As noted above, the underlying AD investigation in this proceeding was continued pursuant to section 734(g) of the Act, following the acceptance of the 2019 Agreement. Commerce made a final affirmative determination, 24 and the ITC found a threat of material injury. 25 Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c) of the Act, Commerce will issue an AD order and instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise, effective July 14, 2025.

Commerce is currently conducting two administrative reviews of the 2019 Agreement. Commerce initiated one review on November 15, 2023, for the period of review from September 1, 2022, through August 31, 2023 (2022-2023 review). 26 Commerce initiated the second review on October 17, 2024, for the period of review from September 1, 2023, through August 31, 2024 (2023-2024 review). 27 The final results of the 2022-2023 review are due to be issued by Commerce on July 8, 2025, prior to the effective date of termination of the 2019 Agreement on July 14, 2025. However, if Commerce terminates the 2019 Agreement, the ongoing 2023-2024 review would be moot. Therefore, Commerce will rescind the 2023-2024 review of the 2019 Agreement on July 14, 2025, the effective date of termination of the 2019 Agreement.

Commerce has notified the ITC of its intent to terminate the 2019 Agreement and issue the AD order. 28

As described above, if Commerce terminates the 2019 Agreement and resumes the AD investigation, Commerce will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of entries of fresh tomatoes from Mexico that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the July 14, 2025, effective date of the termination of the 2019 Agreement. CBP shall require AD cash deposits for entries of the subject merchandise based on the final weighted-average dumping margins, which range from 3.91 to 30.48 percent. 29

This determination is issued and published in accordance with section 734(i) of the Act.

Address: Please submit nominations to Tina Faecke via email at tina.faecke@nist.gov. Nominations may also be mailed to Tina Faecke, Designated Federal Officer, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8615. Additional information regarding the ACEHR, including its charter and current members may be found on its electronic home page at https://nehrp.gov/committees/index.htm.

Contact Information: John “Jay” Harris, Acting Director, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8615, telephone 301-975-6538 or via email at john.harris@nist.gov.

The Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction (Committee) was established in accordance with the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2004, Public Law 108-360 (42 U.S.C. 7704(a)(5)) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Committee will act in the public interest to assess trends and developments in the science and engineering of earthquake hazards reduction; effectiveness of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (Program) in carrying out the activities under section (a)(2) of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7704(a)(2)); the need to revise the Program; and the management, coordination, implementation, and activities of the Program.

2. The Committee will function solely as an advisory body, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

3. The Committee shall report to the Director of NIST at least once every two years on its findings of the assessments and its recommendations for ways to improve the Program. In developing recommendations, the Committee shall consider the recommendations of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee (SESAC).

1. The Committee shall consist of not fewer than 11, nor more than 17 members. Members shall reflect the wide diversity of technical disciplines, competencies, and communities involved in earthquake hazards reduction. Members shall be selected on the basis of established records of distinguished service in their professional community and their knowledge of issues affecting the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.

2. The Director of NIST shall appoint the members of the Committee. Members shall be selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance.

3. The term of office of each member of the Committee shall be three years, except that vacancy appointments shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term of the vacancy and that members shall have staggered terms such that the Committee will have approximately one-third new or reappointed members each year.

1. Members of the Committee shall not be compensated for their services, but may, upon request, be allowed travel and per diem expenses in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq., while attending meetings of the Committee or subcommittees thereof, or while otherwise performing duties at the request of the Chairperson, while away from their homes or regular places of business.

2. Members of the Committee shall serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs) and will be subject to the ethics standards applicable to SGEs and are required to file an annual Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report.

3. The Committee members shall meet at least once per year. Additional meetings may be called whenever requested by the NIST Director; such meetings may be in the form of telephone conference calls and/or videoconferences.

4. Committee meetings are open to the public.

1. Members will be drawn from industry and other communities having an interest in the Program, such as, but not limited to, research and academic institutions, industry standards development organizations, State and local government, and financial communities, who are qualified to provide advice on earthquake hazards reduction and represent all related scientific, architectural, and engineering disciplines.

2. Any person who has completed two consecutive full terms of service on the Committee shall be ineligible for appointment for a third term during the two-year period following the expiration of the second term.

3. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service. The field of expertise that the candidate represents should be specified in the nomination letter. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment.

Address: Please submit nominations to Robert Fangmeyer, Director, Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1020. Nominations may also be submitted via email to Robert.Fangmeyer@nist.gov. Additional information regarding the Committee, including its charter, current membership list, and executive summary, may be found at http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/community/overseers.cfm.

Contact Information: Robyn Decker, Designated Federal Officer, Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1020; telephone 301-975-2361 or via email at Robyn@nist.gov.

The Board of Overseers of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (Board) was established in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(2)(B), pursuant the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Board shall review the work of the private sector contractor(s), which assists the Director of NIST in administering the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (Award). The Board will make such suggestions for the improvement of the Award process as it deems necessary.

2. The Board shall make an annual report on the results of Award activities to the Director of NIST, along with its recommendations for the improvement of the Award process.

3. The Board will function solely as an advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

4. The Board will report to the Director of NIST.

1. The Board will consist of at least five and approximately 12 members selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance, and for their preeminence in the field of organizational performance excellence. There will be a balanced representation from U.S. service, manufacturing, nonprofit, education, and health care industries. The Board will include members familiar with the quality, performance improvement operations, and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, service companies, nonprofits, health care providers, and educational institutions.

2. Board members will be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce for three-year terms and will serve at the discretion of the Secretary. All terms will commence on March 1 and end on the last day of February of the appropriate years.

1. Members of the Board shall serve without compensation, but may, upon request, be reimbursed travel expenses, including per diem, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq.

2. The Board will meet at least annually, but usually two times a year. Additional meetings may be called as deemed necessary by the NIST Director.

3. Board meetings are open to the public. Board members do not have access to classified or proprietary information in connection with their Board duties.

1. Nominations are sought from the private and public sector as described above.

2. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service and shall be familiar with the quality improvement operations and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, service companies, educational institutions, health care providers, and nonprofit organizations. The relevant expertise of the candidate should be specified in the nomination letter. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment. Besides participation at meetings, it is desired that members be able to devote the equivalent of seven days between meetings to either developing or researching topics of potential interest, and so forth, in furtherance of their Board duties.

Address: Please submit nominations to Benjamin Davis, Designated Federal Officer, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Nominations may also be submitted via email to IACNOM@chips.gov. Additional information regarding the Committee, including its charter, current membership list, and executive summary, may be found at https://www.nist.gov/chips/industrial-advisory-committee.

Contact Information: Benjamin Davis, Designated Federal Officer, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Nominations may also be submitted via email to IACNOM@Chips.gov.

The Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, established the Industrial Advisory Committee (the Committee) in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., and the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Act), Public Law 116-283, section 9906(b). The Committee shall assess and provide guidance to the Secretary, through the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), on matters relating to microelectronics research, development, manufacturing, and policy.

1. The Committee shall act in the public interest to provide advice to the Secretary of Commerce through the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on matters relating to microelectronics research, development, manufacturing, and policy.

2. The Committee will function solely as an advisory body, in accordance with the provisions of FACA. The Committee shall assess and provide guidance to the Secretary of Commerce, through NIST, on—

a. science and technology needs of the nation's domestic microelectronics industry;

b. the extent to which the strategy developed under section 9906(a)(3) of the Act is helping maintain United States leadership in microelectronics manufacturing;

c. assessment of the research and development programs and activities authorized under section 9906 of the Act; and

d. opportunities for new public-private partnerships to advance microelectronics research, development, and domestic manufacturing.

The Committee shall not participate in selecting recipients of Federal financial assistance.

Members of the Committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. The Committee shall be composed of not fewer than 12 members who are qualified to provide advice to the United States Government on matters relating to microelectronics research, development, manufacturing, and policy. The membership shall be fairly balanced among representatives of the semiconductor industry, representatives of Federal laboratories and academia, and other members. Members of the Committee shall serve as representative members or as regular government employee (RGE) members.

1. The Committee members serve three-year terms and may serve two consecutive terms at the discretion of the Secretary, except that vacancy appointments shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term of the vacancy and that members shall have staggered terms such that the Committee will have approximately one-third new or reappointed members each year. Members who are not able to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of the Committee will have their membership terminated. A member who has served two consecutive full terms is ineligible to serve a third term for a period of one year following the expiration of the second term. Vacancies are filled as soon as highly qualified candidates in needed areas are identified and available to serve.

2. The Secretary of Commerce shall appoint the Committee Chair and Vice-Chair from among the Committee membership. The tenures of the Chair and Vice-Chair shall be two years and can be modified at the discretion of the Secretary. The Vice-Chair shall perform the duties of the Chair in his or her absence. In case a vacancy occurs in the position of the Chair or Vice-Chair, the Secretary shall select a member to fill such a vacancy; the Vice-Chair will succeed the Chair in the interim until the Secretary's appointment of a member to fill the Chair's vacancy.

3. Committee members will be reimbursed for travel and per diem as it pertains to official business of the Committee in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5701 et seq. Committee members will serve without compensation, except that Federal Government employees who are members of the Committee shall remain covered by their compensation system pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(h).

4. Members shall not reference or otherwise utilize their membership on the Committee in connection with public statements made in their personal capacities without a disclaimer that the views expressed are their own and do not represent the views of the Committee, NIST, or the Department of Commerce.

5. NIST, when necessary and consistent with the Committee's mission and Departmental policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, and working groups, drawn in whole or in part from the Committee, pursuant to the provisions of FACA, the FACA implementing regulations, and applicable Departmental guidance. The Department of Commerce requires that each subcommittee include at least one member of the Committee. Subcommittees must report back to the Committee and must not provide advice or work products directly to NIST or the Secretary, and any recommendations based on their work will be deliberated and adopted by the Committee prior to dissemination.

NIST uses a nomination process to identify candidates for the Committee. Nominations are requested through annual announcements in the Federal Register and through solicitations to NIST, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, the National Academies, professional societies, business associations, labor associations, and other appropriate organizations and individuals in order to ensure a diverse pool of applicants. Candidates may be nominated by their peers or may self-nominate. NIST requests that the nomination includes a resume or biographical sketch that specifically identifies the qualifications of the individual being nominated. Qualifications considered may include, among others: scientific and technical knowledge in selected areas and professional experience. The Director of NIST recommends one or more candidates for further review to fill vacancies on the Committee on the basis of the qualifications, the sectors the candidates may represent and the existing representation on the Committee, and the other balance factors. This further review is to ensure compliance with Federal governance requirements, including compliance with the Committee's charter and membership balance plan. The Secretary of Commerce makes the final decision for appointment to the Committee.

Address: Please submit nominations to Jeffrey Brewer, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8930, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930. Nominations may also be submitted via email at Jeffrey.Brewer@nist.gov, Attn: ISPAB Nominations. Additional information regarding the ISPAB, including its charter and current membership list, may be found on its electronic home page at http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SMA/ispab/index.html.

Contact Information: Jeffrey Brewer, ISPAB Designated Federal Officer (DFO), NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8930, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930; telephone 301-975-2489; or via email at Jeffrey.Brewer@nist.gov.

The ISPAB (Committee or Board) was originally chartered as the Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board by the Department of Commerce pursuant to the Computer Security Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-235). The E-Government Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-347, Title III), amended section 21 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-4), including changing the Committee's name, and the charter was amended accordingly.

1. The Board will identify emerging managerial, technical, administrative, and physical safeguard issues relative to information security and privacy.

2. The Board will advise NIST, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on information security and privacy issues pertaining to Federal Government information systems, including through review of proposed standards and guidelines developed by NIST.

3. The Board shall report to the Director of NIST.

4. The Board reports annually to the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of OMB, the Director of the National Security Agency, and the appropriate committees of the Congress.

5. The Board will function solely as an advisory body, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Director of NIST will appoint the Chairperson and the members of the ISPAB, and members serve at the discretion of the NIST Director. Members will be selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance.

2. The ISPAB will consist of a total of 12 members and a Chairperson, for a total of 13.

• The Board will include four members from outside the Federal Government who are eminent in the information technology industry, at least one of whom is representative of small or medium sized companies in such industries.

• The Board will include four members from outside the Federal Government who are eminent in the fields of information technology, or related disciplines, but who are not employed by or representative of a producer of information technology.

• The Board will include four members from the Federal Government who have information system management experience, including experience in information security and privacy, at least one of whom shall be from the National Security Agency.

1. Members of the Board, other than full-time employees of the Federal government, will not be compensated for their services, but will, upon request, be allowed travel expenses pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq., while otherwise performing duties at the request of the Board Chairperson, while away from their homes or a regular place of business.

2. Meetings of the ISPAB are usually two to three days in duration and are usually held quarterly. ISPAB meetings are open to the public, including the press. Members do not have access to classified or proprietary information in connection with their ISPAB duties.

1. Nominations are being accepted in all three categories described above.

2. Nominees should have specific experience related to information security or privacy issues, particularly as they pertain to Federal information technology. Letters of nomination should include the category of membership for which the candidate is applying and a summary of the candidate's qualifications for that specific category. Also include (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and any Federal employment. Each nomination letter should state that the person agrees to the nomination, acknowledges the responsibilities of serving on the ISPAB, and that they will actively participate in good faith in the tasks of the ISPAB.

3. Besides participation at meetings, it is desired that members be able to devote a minimum of two days between meetings to developing draft issue papers, researching topics of potential interest, and so forth in furtherance of their ISPAB duties.

4. Selection of ISPAB members will not be limited to individuals who are nominated. Nominations that are received and meet the requirements will be kept on file to be reviewed as ISPAB vacancies occur.

Address: Please submit nominations to Robert Fangmeyer, Director, Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1020. Nominations may also be submitted via email Robert.Fangmeyer@nist.gov. Additional information regarding the Committee, including its charter, current membership list, and executive summary, may be found at https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/how-baldrige-works/baldrige-community/judges-panel.

Contact Information: Robyn Decker, Designated Federal Officer, Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1020; telephone 301-975-2361 or via email at Robyn@nist.gov.

The Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (Panel) was established in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Panel will ensure the integrity of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (Award) selection process. Based on a review of results of examiners' scoring of written applications, Panel members will vote on which applicants' merit site visits by examiners to verify the accuracy of quality improvements claimed by applicants. The Panel will also review results and findings from site visits, and recommend Award recipients.

2. The Panel will ensure that individual judges will not participate in the review of applicants as to which they have any real or perceived conflict of interest.

3. The Panel will function solely as an advisory body, and will comply with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

4. The Panel will report to the Director of NIST.

1. The Panel will consist of no less than 9, and not more than 12, members selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance. There will be a balanced representation from U.S. service, manufacturing, nonprofit, education, and health care industries. The Panel will include members familiar with the quality improvement operations and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, service companies, nonprofits, health care providers, and educational institutions.

2. Panel members will be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce for three-year terms and will serve at the discretion of the Secretary. All terms will commence on March 1 and end on the last day of February of the appropriate year.

3. Members who are not Federal employees will serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs) and will be subject to the ethical standards applicable to SGEs.

1. Members of the Panel shall serve without compensation, but may, upon request, be reimbursed travel expenses, including per diem, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq.

2. The Panel will meet three times per year. Additional meetings may be called as deemed necessary by the NIST Director or by the Chairperson. Meetings are usually one to four days in duration. In addition, each Judge must attend an annual three-day Examiner training course.

3. When approved by the Department of Commerce Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration, Panel meetings are closed or partially closed to the public.

1. Nominations are sought from all U.S. service and manufacturing industries, education, health care, and nonprofits as described above.

2. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service and shall be familiar with the quality improvement operations and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, service companies, health care providers, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations. The category (field of eminence) for which the candidate is qualified should be specified in the nomination letter. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment. Besides participation at meetings, it is desired that members be either developing or researching topics of potential interest, reading Baldrige applications, and so forth, in furtherance of their Panel duties.

Address: Please submit nominations to Jennifer Rosa, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4800. Nominations may also be submitted via email at Jennifer.Rosa@nist.gov. Additional information regarding MEP, including its charter, may be found on its electronic home page at http://www.nist.gov/mep/advisory-board.cfm.

Contact Information: Jennifer Rosa, Designated Federal Officer, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4800; telephone 301-975-3091, or via email at Jennifer.Rosa@nist.gov.

The MEP Advisory Board (Board) is authorized under section 501 of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (Pub. L. 114-329); codified at 15 U.S.C. 278k(m), as amended, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Board will provide advice on MEP activities, plans, and policies.

2. The Board will assess the soundness of MEP plans and strategies.

3. The Board will assess current performance against MEP program plans.

4. The Board will function solely in an advisory capacity, and in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

5. The Board shall transmit through the Director of NIST an annual report to the Secretary of Commerce for transmittal to Congress not later than 30 days after the submission to Congress of the President's annual budget request each year. The report shall address the status of the MEP program.

1. The Board shall consist of not fewer than 10 members, appointed by the Director of NIST and broadly representative of stakeholders. At least 2 members shall be employed by or on an advisory board for a MEP Center, at least 5 members shall be from U.S. small businesses in the manufacturing sector, and at least 1 member shall represent a community college. No member shall be an employee of the Federal Government.

2. The Director of NIST shall appoint the members of the Board. Members shall be selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance. Board members serve at the discretion of the Director of NIST.

3. The term of office of each member of the Board shall be three years, except that vacancy appointments shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term of the vacancy. Any person who has completed two consecutive full terms of service on the Board shall thereafter be ineligible for appointment during the one-year period following the expiration of the second term.

1. Members of the Board will not be compensated for their services but will, upon request, be allowed travel and per diem expenses as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq., while attending meetings of the Board or subcommittees thereof, or while otherwise performing duties at the request of the Chair, while away from their homes or regular places of business.

2. The Board will meet at least biannually. Additional meetings may be called by the Director of NIST or the Designated Federal Officer (DFO).

3. Committee meetings are open to the public.

1. Nominations are being accepted in all categories described above.

2. Nominees should have specific experience related to manufacturing and industrial extension services. Letters of nomination should include the category of membership for which the candidate is applying and a summary of the candidate's qualifications for that specific category.

3. Nominations that are received and meet the requirements will be kept on file to be reviewed as Board vacancies occur.

Address: Please submit nominations to Cheryl Gendron, Designated Federal Officer, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8900, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Nominations may also be submitted via email to Cheryl.Gendron@nist.gov.

Contact Information: Cheryl Gendron, Designated Federal Officer, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8900, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Nominations may also be submitted via email to Cheryl.Gendron@nist.gov.

The Secretary of Commerce established the National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee (the NAIAC or the Committee) pursuant to section 5104 of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020 (Pub. L. 116-283), hereinafter referred to as the Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

The Committee shall provide advice to the President and the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Office on matters related to the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative (Initiative). The purposes of the Initiative are: (1) ensuring continued United States leadership in artificial intelligence research and development; (2) leading the world in the development and use of trustworthy artificial intelligence systems in the public and private sectors; (3) preparing the present and future United States workforce for the integration of artificial intelligence systems across all sectors of the economy and society; and (4) coordinating ongoing artificial intelligence research, development, and demonstration activities among the civilian agencies, the Department of Defense, and the Intelligence Community to ensure that each informs the work of the others.

The Committee shall advise the President and the Initiative Office on matters related to the Initiative, including recommendations related to:

a. The current state of United States competitiveness and leadership in artificial intelligence, including the scope and scale of United States investments in artificial intelligence research and development in the international context;

b. The progress made in implementing the Initiative, including a review of the degree to which the Initiative has achieved the goals according to the metrics established by the Interagency Committee under section 5103(d)(2) of the Act;

c. The state of the science around artificial intelligence, including progress toward artificial general intelligence;

d. Issues related to artificial intelligence and the United States workforce, including matters relating to the potential for using artificial intelligence for workforce training, the possible consequences of technological displacement, and supporting workforce training opportunities for occupations that lead to economic self-sufficiency for individuals with barriers to employment and historically underrepresented populations, including minorities, Indians (as defined in 25 U.S.C. 5304), low-income populations, and persons with disabilities;

e. How to leverage the resources of the Initiative to streamline and enhance operations in various areas of government operations, including health care, cybersecurity, infrastructure, and disaster recovery;

f. The need to update the Initiative;

g. The balance of activities and funding across the Initiative;

h. Whether the strategic plan developed or updated by the Interagency Committee established under section 5103(d)(2) of the Act is helping to maintain United States leadership in artificial intelligence;

i. The management, coordination, and activities of the Initiative;

j. Whether ethical, legal, safety, security, and other appropriate societal issues are adequately addressed by the Initiative;

k. Opportunities for international cooperation with strategic allies on artificial intelligence research activities, standards development, and the compatibility of international regulations;

l. Accountability and legal rights, including matters relating to oversight of artificial intelligence systems using regulatory and nonregulatory approaches, the responsibility for any violations of existing laws by an artificial intelligence system, and ways to balance advancing innovation while protecting individual rights; and

m. How artificial intelligence can enhance opportunities for diverse geographic regions of the United States, including urban, Tribal, and rural communities.

In addition, pursuant to section 5104(e) of the Act, the Committee's Chairperson shall establish a subcommittee that shall provide advice to the President, through the Committee, on matters related to the development of AI relating to law enforcement, including advice on the following:

A. Bias, including whether the use of facial recognition by government authorities, including law enforcement agencies, is taking into account ethical considerations and addressing whether such use should be subject to additional oversight, controls, and limitations.

B. Security of data, including law enforcement's access to data and the security parameters for that data.

C. Adoptability, including methods to allow the United States Government and industry to take advantage of artificial intelligence systems for security or law enforcement purposes while at the same time ensuring the potential abuse of such technologies is sufficiently mitigated.

D. Legal standards, including those designed to ensure the use of artificial intelligence systems are consistent with the privacy rights, civil rights and civil liberties, and disability rights issues raised by the use of these technologies.

Members of the Committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. The Committee shall consist of not less than 9 or more than 35 members, who represent broad and interdisciplinary expertise and perspectives, including from academic institutions, companies across diverse sectors, nonprofit and civil society entities, including civil rights and disability rights organizations, and Federal laboratories, who represent geographic diversity, and who are qualified to provide advice and information on science and technology research, development, ethics, standards, education, technology transfer, commercial application, security, and economic competitiveness related to artificial intelligence.

In selecting the members of the Committee, the Secretary of Commerce shall seek and give consideration to recommendations from Congress, industry, nonprofit organizations, the scientific community (including the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, scientific professional societies, and academic institutions), the defense and law enforcement communities, and other appropriate organizations.

Meetings will be conducted at least twice each year.

1. Generally, Committee meetings are open to the public.

2. Meetings may be held in-person in selected locations across the country and/or virtually.

1. Nominations are sought from all fields, sectors, and perspectives described above.

2. Nominees should represent broad and interdisciplinary expertise and perspectives, including from academic institutions, companies across diverse sectors, nonprofit and civil society entities, including civil rights and disability rights organizations, and Federal laboratories, who represent geographic diversity, and who are qualified to provide advice and information on science and technology research, development, ethics, standards, education, technology transfer, commercial application, security, and economic competitiveness related to artificial intelligence. A resume or C.V. should be sent that includes a summary of the candidate's qualifications with a nomination letter, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment. The field of eminence for which the candidate is qualified should be specified in the nomination letter. In addition, each nomination letter should state whether the candidate seeks to serve on the Committee, the Subcommittee, or both; and that the candidate acknowledges the responsibilities of serving and will actively participate in good faith in the tasks of the Committee or Subcommittee, as appropriate. Third-party nomination letters should state that the candidate agrees to the nomination.

Address: Please submit nominations to Judy Bowie, Designated Federal Officer, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8615 or via email at Judy.Bowie@nist.gov. Additional information regarding the NCST Advisory Committee, including its charter, may be found on its electronic home page at https://www.nist.gov/el/disaster-resilience/disaster-and-failure-studies/national-construction-safety-team-ncst/advisory.

Contact Information: Tanya Brown-Giammanco, Director, Disaster and Failure Studies Program, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8615, telephone 301-975-2822; or via email at Tanya.Brown-Giammanco@nist.gov.

The NCST Advisory Committee (Committee) was established in accordance with the National Construction Safety Team Act, Public Law 107-231, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Committee shall advise the Director of NIST on carrying out the National Construction Safety Team Act (Act), review the procedures developed under section 2(c)(1) of the Act, and review the reports issued under section 8 of the Act.

2. The Committee functions solely as an advisory body, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

3. The Committee shall report to the Director of NIST.

4. On January 1 of each year, the Committee shall transmit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that includes: (1) an evaluation of National Construction Safety Team (Team) activities, along with recommendations to improve the operation and effectiveness of Teams, and (2) an assessment of the implementation of the recommendations of Teams and of the Committee.

1. The Committee shall consist of no less than 4 and no more than 12 members. Members shall reflect the wide diversity of technical disciplines and competencies involved in the National Construction Safety Teams investigations. Members shall be selected on the basis of established records of distinguished service in their professional community and their knowledge of issues affecting the National Construction Safety Teams.

2. The Director of NIST shall appoint the members of the Committee, and they will be selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance.

1. Members of the Committee shall not be compensated for their services but may, upon request, be allowed travel and per diem expenses in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5703.

2. Members of the Committee shall serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs), will be subject to the ethics standards applicable to SGEs, and are required to file an annual Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report.

3. The Committee shall meet at least once per year. Additional meetings may be called whenever requested by the NIST Director or the Designated Federal Officer (DFO); such meetings may be in the form of telephone conference calls and/or videoconferences.

1. Nominations are sought from industry and other communities having an interest in the National Construction Safety Teams investigations.

2. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service. The field of expertise that the candidate represents should be specified in the nomination letter. Nominations for a particular field should come from organizations or individuals within that field. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment.

Address: Please submit nominations to the Designated Federal Officer, NTIS, via email at FACA@ntis.gov . Additional information regarding the NTIS, including its charter, current membership list, and past reports may be found on its electronic homepage at https://www.ntis.gov/about/advisorybd/index.xhtml.

Contact Information: Bobby Khondker, (703) 605-6185, BKhondker@ntis.gov or Simone Gills (703) 605-6586, SGills@ntis.gov.

The Secretary of Commerce, pursuant to section 212(c) of the National Technical Information Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 3704b(c)), established the Advisory Board, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The NTIS Advisory Board shall review and make recommendations to improve NTIS programs, operations, and general policies in support of NTIS' mission to advance Federal data priorities, promote economic growth, and enable operational excellence by providing innovative data services to Federal agencies through joint venture partnerships with the private sector.

2. The Board shall report to the Secretary of Commerce and to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology through the Director of NTIS.

3. The Board shall act in the public interest to:

a. Provide advice on the optimal data services business and operating model to best implement NTIS' joint venture authority.

b. Provide advice on the means, including infrastructure and process improvements, to make Federal data easier to find, access, analyze, and combine.

c. Assess progress in evolving NTIS programs toward a focus on Federal data priorities.

d. Assess the use of merit-based criteria and processes to plan, conduct, and oversee programs and projects, including the selection of joint venture partners.

e. Assess policies in connection with fees and charges for NTIS services in order for the agency to operate on a substantially self-sustaining basis, as required by law.

f. Assess organizational capabilities required to carry out NTIS's mission, including capabilities in data science and for operational management of its project portfolio.

a. The NTIS Advisory Board shall be composed of a Chairperson appointed by the Secretary and four other members appointed by the Secretary. In the event of a vacancy in the Chairperson position, the NTIS Director may designate a member to serve as acting Chairperson until a Chairperson is appointed by the Secretary.

b. Members shall be selected solely on the basis of established records of distinguished service and objectivity; shall have recognized expertise in data collection, compilation, analysis, use, and dissemination, as well as data science, information technology, cybersecurity, and privacy. Members will be selected from the business, academic, non- profit, and State and local government communities. Reasonable efforts will be made to ensure members represent the entire spectrum of Federal data interests including demographic, economic, trade, health, scientific, patent, environmental, geospatial, cybersecurity, and transactional data. No Federal Government employee shall serve as a member of the Board.

c. The term of office of each member of the Board shall be three years, except that vacancy appointments shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term of the vacancy. All appointments shall automatically terminate if the charter is terminated or not renewed. All members serve at the pleasure of the Secretary.

d. Any person who has completed two consecutive full terms of service on the Board shall be ineligible for appointment for a third term during the one-year period following the expiration of the second term.

e. Members shall serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs) and will be subject to all ethical standards and rules applicable to SGEs.

1. Members of the Committee will not be paid for their services, but will, upon request, be allowed travel and per diem in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq., while attending meetings of the Committee or of its subcommittees, or while otherwise performing duties at the request of the chairperson, while away from their homes or a regular place of business.

2. The Board shall meet at the call of the Secretary or the Secretary's designee, but not less often than once every six months.

3. NTIS may establish such subcommittees of its members as may be necessary, pursuant to the provisions of FACA, the FACA implementing regulations, and applicable Department of Commerce guidance. Subcommittees will report to the NTIS Advisory Board and may not provide advice or work products directly to the Department of Commerce or NTIS.

1. NTIS seeks nominations of practitioners with recognized expertise in data collection, compilation, analysis, use and dissemination, as well as data science, information technology, cybersecurity and privacy.

2. Members will be selected form the business, academic, non-profit, and State and local government communities.

3. Reasonable efforts will be made to ensure members represent the entire spectrum of Federal data interests including demographic, economic, trade, health, scientific, patent, environmental, geospatial, cybersecurity, and transactional data. Collectively, their knowledge will include all types of data the Federal Government collects, compiles, analyzes, uses and disseminates.

4. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service. The field of expertise in which the candidate is qualified should be specified in the nomination letter. Nominations for a particular field should come from organizations or individuals within that field. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment. In additional, each nomination letter should state that the person agrees to the nominations, acknowledges the responsibilities of serving on the Board, and will actively participate in good faith in the tasks of the NTIS Advisory Board.

Address: Please submit nominations to Stephanie Shaw, Designated Federal Officer, VCAT, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1060, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1060. Nominations may also be submitted via email at Stephanie.Shaw@nist.gov. Additional information regarding the VCAT, including its charter, current membership list, and past reports may be found on its electronic homepage at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/.

Contact Information: Stephanie Shaw, Designated Federal Officer, VCAT, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1060, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1060, via email at Stephanie.Shaw@nist.gov or telephone: 301-975-2667.

The VCAT (Committee) was established in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 278 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.

1. The Committee shall review and make recommendations regarding general policy for NIST, its organization, its budget, and its programs, within the framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the President and the Congress. 15 U.S.C. 278(a).

2. The Committee shall provide an annual report, through the Director of NIST, to the Secretary of Commerce for submission to the Congress not later than 30 days after the submittal to Congress of the President's annual budget request in each year. Such report shall deal essentially, though not necessarily exclusively, with policy issues or matters which affect NIST, or with which the Committee in its official role as the private sector policy adviser of NIST is concerned. Each such report shall identify areas of research and research techniques of the Institute of potential importance to the long-term competitiveness of United States industry, in which the Institute possesses special competence, which could be used to assist United States enterprises and Untied States industrial joint research and development ventures. 15 U.S.C. 278(h)(1). The Committee shall submit, through the Director of NIST, to the Secretary and the Congress such additional reports on specific policy matters as it deems appropriate. 15 U.S.C. 278(h)(2).

3. The Committee will function solely as an advisory body, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

4. The Committee shall report to the Director of NIST.

1. The Director of NIST shall appoint the members of the Committee. Members shall be selected on a clear, standardized basis, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidance. 15 U.S.C. 278(a). No employee of the Federal Government shall serve as a member of the Committee. 15 U.S.C. 278(b).

2. Members of the Committee shall serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs) and will be subject to the ethics standards applicable to SGEs.

3. The Committee is composed of not fewer than nine members appointed by the NIST Director and selected to provide representation of a cross-section of the traditional and emerging United States industries. 15 U.S.C. 278(b). The term of office of each member of the Committee shall be three years, except that vacancy appointments shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term of the vacancy. 15 U.S.C. 278(c)(1). Members shall serve at the discretion of the Director of NIST.

4. Any person who has completed two consecutive full terms of service on the Committee shall be ineligible for appointment for a third term during the one-year period following the expiration of the second term. 15 U.S.C. 278(c)(1).

5. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 278(f), the Committee chairperson and vice chairperson shall be elected by the members of the Committee at each annual meeting occurring in an even-numbered year. The vice chairperson shall perform the duties of the chairperson in his or her absence. In case a vacancy occurs in the position of the chairperson or vice chairperson, the Committee shall elect a member to fill such vacancy.

6. Members of the Committee will not be compensated for their services, but will, upon request, be allowed travel expenses in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5703 et seq., while attending meetings of the Committee or of its subcommittees, or while otherwise performing duties at the request of the chairperson, while away from their homes or a regular place of business.

7. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 278(g), the Committee may, with the concurrence of a majority of its members, permit the appointment of a staff consisting of not more than four professional staff members and such clerical staff members as may be necessary. Such staff members shall be appointed by the Director after consultation with the chairperson of the Committee and assigned at the direction of the Committee.

8. Subcommittees: Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 278(e), the Committee shall have an executive committee and may delegate to it such powers and functions of the Committee as it deems appropriate. The Committee and/or the Director of NIST may establish such other subcommittees, task forces, and working groups consisting of members from the parent Committee as may be necessary, subject to the provisions of FACA, the FACA implementing regulations, and applicable Department of Commerce guidance. Subcommittees must report back to the Committee and any recommendations based on their work will be deliberated and agreed upon by the Committee prior to dissemination to NIST.

1. Meetings of the VCAT usually take place at NIST Gaithersburg or Boulder site. The Committee will meet at least twice each year at the call of the chairperson or whenever one-third of the members so request in writing. The Committee shall not act in the absence of a quorum, which shall consist of a majority of the members of the Committee not having a conflict of interest in the matter being considered by the Committee. 15 U.S.C. 278(d).

2. Generally, Committee meetings are open to the public.

1. Nominations are sought from all fields described above.

2. Nominees should have established records of distinguished service and shall be eminent in fields such as business, research, new product development, critical and emerging technologies, engineering, labor, management consulting, and international standards. The category (field of eminence) for which the candidate is qualified should be specified in the nomination letter. A summary of the candidate's qualifications should be included with the nomination, including (where applicable) current or former service on Federal advisory boards and Federal employment. In addition, each nomination letter should state that the candidate agrees to the nomination, acknowledges the responsibilities of serving on the VCAT, and will actively participate in good faith in the tasks of the VCAT.

In the Federal Register of December 26, 2024, in 89 FR 105006, in FR Doc. 2024-31018, on page 105007, in column 3, paragraph 2, the percentage of management costs to fishery value for the 2024 calendar year was published as 5.2 percent of the standard ex-vessel value. The total fishery value found on page 105007, in column 3, paragraph 3 of the above document was published as a 43 percent decline from the prior year.

After publication it was discovered that many correctly reported landings were excluded from the fishery valuation calculation.

In the Federal Register of December 26, 2024, in 89 FR 105006, in FR Doc. 2024-31018, on page 105007, in column 3, paragraph 2, the percentage of management costs to fishery value for the 2024 calendar year is corrected to 3.4 percent. The total fishery value found on page 105007, in column 3, paragraph 3 of the above document is corrected to a 13 percent decline in fishery value from the prior year. Since 3.4 percent is still greater than the statutory cap of 3.0 percent as noted in the original document, the effective fee percentage for 2024 remains 3.0 percent.

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

Thursday, May 8, 2025; 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., EDT

The meeting will begin with introductions and adoption of agenda, review and approval of minutes and summary from the February 2025 SSC Meeting, and scope of work.

The SSC will review revised overfishing limit and acceptable biological catch recommendations for SEDAR 88, including a presentation and SSC discussion. The SSC will then discuss Status Determination Criteria and Overfishing Limits (OFL) and Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) Projections Settings for Gulf Stock Assessments, and SEDAR 68 Updated Projections for Scamp and Yellowmouth Grouper including presentations, background materials and SSC discussion.

Following lunch, the SSC will review the Center for Independent Experts (CIE) Independent Peer Review of the Shrimp Bycatch Estimation Methodology for Finfish Species, New Bycatch Estimates and Other Analyses for Smalltooth Sawfish and Giant Manta Ray, and Population Viability Analysis for Endangered and Threatened Resources that Interact with the Shrimp Fishery, including presentations and SSC discussions.

The SSC will review the SEDAR Process Update, SEDAR 100: Gulf Gray Triggerfish Participants for Review Phase, SSC SEDAR Workshops Updates for SEDAR 87 Gulf Penaeid Shrimp Assessment Process and SEDAR 98 Gulf Red Snapper Data Workshop, and Takeaways from Science Coordination Subcommittee, including presentations and SSC discussion.

Public comments will be heard at the end of the day, if any, followed by review of any Other Business items.

The meeting will also be broadcast via webinar. You may register for the webinar by visiting www.gulfcouncil.org and clicking on the SSC meeting on the calendar.

The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on www.gulfcouncil.org as they become available.

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

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Kathy Pereira, (813) 348-1630, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

In 2022, the USPTO published a notice implementing the Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program. See Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program, 87 FR 33750 (June 3, 2022) (2022 Notice). The 2022 Notice cited Executive Order 14008 of January 27, 2021, and indicated that an applicant may file a petition to request that an application be advanced out of turn (accorded special status) for the first Office action on the merits without satisfying all the current requirements of the accelerated examination program. See id. at 33751-33752. In 2023, the USPTO expanded and extended the program to expire at the earlier of June 7, 2027, or the date the USPTO accepted a total of 4,000 grantable petitions. See Expansion and Extension of the Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program, 88 FR 35841 (June 1, 2023).

Executive Order 14148 of January 20, 2025, revoked Executive Order 14008, which had been cited as the basis for the pilot program. See E.O. 14148: Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions, 90 FR 8237, 8238 (January 28, 2025). In accordance with Executive Order 14148, the USPTO posted a notification suspending the program on the program's web page on January 28, 2025. See https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/patent-related-notices/climate-change-mitigation-pilot-program .

Through this notice, the USPTO is now formally terminating the program. Terminating the program allows the USPTO to dedicate USPTO resources to reducing pendency across all applications regardless of what technology the application is directed to, consistent with both 35 U.S.C. 154(b)(1) and statements made at the inception of the program and in the notice of expansion and extension, where the USPTO reserved the discretion to terminate the program depending on factors such as workload and resources needed to administer the program. See 87 FR 33750 at 33751.

Any petition to participate in the program (“climate petition”) filed after 5 p.m. ET on January 28, 2025, will not be granted. The phrase “any petition to participate in the program” encompasses initial and renewed climate petitions. Accordingly, a renewed climate petition filed after 5 p.m. ET on January 28, 2025, will not be granted, irrespective of the filing date and time of the initial climate petition and whether the USPTO's dismissal of the initial climate petition afforded applicant an opportunity to correct deficiencies by filing a subsequent petition. Similarly, a request under 37 CFR 1.181 for reconsideration of a decision dismissing a climate petition that was filed after 5 p.m. ET on January 28, 2025, will not be granted because any climate petition filed after the suspension of the program is untimely.

The USPTO has removed petition form PTO/SB/457, titled “CERTIFICATION AND PETITION TO MAKE SPECIAL UNDER THE CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PILOT PROGRAM,” from the USPTO's website, and decommissioned the corresponding document code—PET.CLIMATE—in Patent Center. Applicants should not submit stored copies of form PTO/SB/457.

The USPTO will continue to process climate petitions filed by 5 p.m. ET on January 28, 2025, as set forth in Part II of the 2022 Notice, with the exception that applicants will not be afforded an opportunity to correct any deficiencies. See 87 FR at 33752-33753. Patent applications accorded special status because a grantable climate petition was filed by 5 p.m., ET on January 28, 2025, will not lose that status merely because the application is still pending after that deadline. Any such application will retain special status until a first Office action on the merits is issued, and the application will be treated as described in Parts III-VII of the 2022 Notice. See id. at 33753.

Patent applicants interested in expediting the prosecution of their patent application may instead request prioritized examination under 37 CFR 1.102(e). Under prioritized examination, a patent application is advanced out of turn (accorded special status) for examination until a final disposition is reached if the applicant timely files a request for prioritized examination, accompanied by the appropriate fees, and meets the other conditions of 37 CFR 1.102(e). Small and micro entity discounts of 60% and 80% respectively, for the prioritized examination fee are available for qualified applicants. Prioritized examination is available at the time of filing an original utility or plant application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a). This is referred to as the Track One Program. In addition, a prioritized examination request may be granted for a request for continued examination in a utility or plant application, including an application that has entered the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371. See subsection 708.02(b)(I)(C) of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (9th Edition, Rev. 01.2024, November 2024). The current USPTO fee schedule is available on the USPTO website at http://www.uspto.gov/Fees .

Additional information on the conditions, eligibility requirements, and guidelines for the Track One Program and prioritized examination are available at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/initiatives/usptos-prioritized-patent-examination-program .

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

In accordance with 41 CFR 51-5.3(b), the Committee intends to add this services requirement to the Procurement List as a mandatory purchase only for contracting activity at the location listed below with the proposed qualified nonprofit agency as the authorized source of supply. Prior to adding the service to the Procurement List, the Committee will consider other pertinent information, including information from Government personnel and relevant comments from interested parties regarding the Committee's intent to geographically limit this services requirement.

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

On 3/14/2025 (90 FR 13352), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List. This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3.

After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the product(s) listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

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

1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

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

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

Accordingly, the following product(s) are deleted from the Procurement List:

Under the Proposed Action, the DAF would acquire land for, and construct and operate two HLD-OTHR systems in the northwest region of the United States. Construction and operation of the proposed HLD-OTHR would provide enhanced regional long-range, early detection capability of airborne threats that may be obscured from conventional line of sight radar systems by the curvature of the Earth. These threats are difficult to detect and can strike with limited warning, which reduces the time and response options available to our national leaders. The Proposed Action is needed because U.S. adversaries continue to develop and deploy highly advanced weapons systems capable of disrupting or defeating our military and civilian targets in North America.

The DAF would acquire land currently owned and managed by OMD and seek to withdraw land managed by BLM for siting and construction of these facilities. The acquisition would involve the purchase, lease, and withdrawal of land, conducted through the DoD Major Land Acquisition Proposal.

The EIS will analyze the Proposed Action and a No Action Alternative. Key resources of concern, for which adverse impacts could occur, include cultural resources, visual resources, and biological resources. An assessment of potential impacts to all relevant resource areas will be included in the EIS, including an analysis of environmental effects that are reasonably foreseeable and have a close causal relationship to the Proposed Action.

Potential permits that may be required include, but are not limited to, General Construction and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Additionally, the DAF will consult with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act as well as Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and federally recognized tribes regarding Section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act.

Please provide comments on alternatives or impacts and on relevant information, studies, or analyses with respect to the proposed action. Comments will be accepted at any time during the Environmental Impact Analysis Process; however, to ensure the DAF has sufficient time to consider public scoping comments during preparation of the Draft EIS, please submit comments within the 45-day scoping period. Comments regarding the proposal can be submitted during the scoping meetings, project website, or see the ADDRESSES section in this document. The Draft EIS is anticipated in early 2026 and the Final EIS is anticipated in summer 2027. A decision could be made no earlier than 30 days after the Final EIS.

The DAF invites the public, stakeholders, and other interested parties to attend one or more of the five in-person and one virtual scoping meetings.

During World War II, the U.S. Marine Corps trained on the land now known as PTA. A 1956 maneuver agreement between the Territory of Hawai'i and the Army formally established PTA. In 1964, the State of Hawai'i granted the Army a 65-year lease of approximately 23,000 acres of land for military purposes. The State-owned land now contains utilities, critical infrastructure, maneuver area, and key training facilities, some of which are unavailable elsewhere in Hawai'i. The parcel also allows access between the PTA cantonment area and approximately 84,000 acres of adjacent, federally owned land at PTA. The Army published a Draft EIS on April 8, 2022, and a Second Draft EIS on April 19, 2024. Native Hawaiian Organizations, federal, state, and local agencies and officials, and other stakeholders were invited to participate in the public comment processes for the Draft EIS and Second Draft EIS. The Army held two public meetings each for the Draft EIS and Second Draft EIS. Comments and responses to comments are included in the Final EIS.

The Final EIS evaluates the potential impacts of a range of reasonable alternatives: (1) Maximum Retention (of approximately 22,750 acres); (2) Modified Retention (of approximately 19,700 acres); and (3) Minimum Retention and Access (of approximately 10,100 acres and 11 miles of roads and training trails). The Final EIS also analyzes the potential impacts of the No-Action Alternative, under which Army use of the land would cease altogether when the lease expires in 2029. The Army has identified Alternative 2, Modified Retention, as the Preferred Alternative. To meet the mission of the Army, The Army based its preference on the ability of the alternative, as well as on public comments and environmental, social, technical, and economic considerations.

The Final EIS analyzes land use; biological resources; historic and cultural resources and cultural practices; hazardous substances and hazardous wastes; air quality and greenhouse gases; noise; geology, topography, and soils; water resources; socioeconomics; environmental justice; transportation and traffic; airspace; electromagnetic spectrum; utilities; and human health and safety.

The air quality, greenhouse gas, and environmental justice analyses were prepared according to now-rescinded Executive Orders, the Council on Environmental Quality's NEPA implementing regulations, which are in the process of being rescinded, and the Army's NEPA implementing regulations, which are now under revision. Because analysis regarding air quality, greenhouse gases, and environmental justice was already provided to the public for comment, such analysis is included in the Final EIS.

The Final EIS indicates that under Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, significant adverse impacts could occur on land use (land tenure), biological resources, cultural practices, and environmental justice. The Army has identified measures in the Final EIS to mitigate these adverse impacts.

The No-Action Alternative could have significant adverse impacts on biological resources, socioeconomics, and utilities, significant beneficial impacts on land use, cultural practices, and environmental justice, and less-than-significant impacts on all other resources.

The Army distributed the Final EIS to Native Hawaiian Organizations, Federal, State, and local agencies and officials, and other stakeholders.

Statutory Authority and Function: The Governing Board is established under the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9621). Information on the Governing Board and its work can be found at www.nagb.gov. Notice of the meetings is required under section 1009(a)(2) of 5 U.S.C. chapter 10 (commonly known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act). The Governing Board formulates policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The Governing Board's responsibilities include:

(1) selecting the subject areas to be assessed; (2) developing appropriate student achievement levels; (3) developing assessment objectives and testing specifications that produce an assessment that is valid and reliable, and are based on relevant widely accepted professional standards; (4) developing a process for review of the assessment which includes the active participation of teachers, curriculum specialists, local school administrators, parents, and concerned members of the public; (5) designing the methodology of the assessment to ensure that assessment items are valid and reliable, in consultation with appropriate technical experts in measurement and assessment, content and subject matter, sampling, and other technical experts who engage in large scale surveys; (6) measuring student academic achievement in grades 4, 8, and 12 in the authorized academic subjects; (7) developing guidelines for reporting and disseminating results; (8) developing standards and procedures for regional and national comparisons; (9) taking appropriate actions needed to improve the form, content use, and reporting of results of an assessment; and (10) planning and executing the initial public release of NAEP results.

The meeting of the Governing Board will be held on the following date and time:

On Monday, April 21, 2025, the Governing Board will meet in closed session from 10:00 a.m. to 11:20 a.m. to discuss the NAEP Schedule of Assessments. Governor Beverly Perdue, Chair of the Governing Board, will welcome members and lead discussion on the NAEP Schedule of Assessments. These discussions may impact current and future NAEP contracts and budgets and must be kept confidential to maintain the integrity of the Federal acquisition process. Public disclosure of this confidential information would significantly impede implementation of the NAEP assessment program if conducted in open session. Such matters are protected by exemption 9(B) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.

The Board will continue in open session from 11:20 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. to take action on changes to the Schedule of Assessments.

Registration: Members of the public may attend the open session of the April 21, 2025, meeting of the Governing Board. A link to the final meeting agenda and information on how to register for the open session will be posted on the Governing Board's website, www.nagb.gov, no later than five (5) business days prior to the meeting.

Public Comment: Written comments related to the work of the Governing Board may be submitted to the attention of the DFO, either via email to Angela.Scott@ed.gov or in hard copy to the address listed above. Written comments related to the April 21, 2025, Governing Board meeting should be submitted no later than close of business on April 18, 2025, and should reference the relevant agenda item.

Access to Records of the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1009, the public may inspect the meeting materials and other Governing Board records at 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Suite 1A101, Washington, DC 20024, by emailing Angela.Scott@ed.gov to schedule an appointment. The official verbatim transcripts of the open meeting sessions will be available for public inspection no later than 30 calendar days following each meeting. Requests for the verbatim transcriptions may be made via email to the DFO.

Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the Adobe website. You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Authority: Pub. L. 107-279, title III, section 301—National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9621).

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to provide advice and recommendations concerning the following EM site-specific issues: clean-up activities and environmental restoration; waste and nuclear materials management and disposition; excess facilities; future land use and long-term stewardship. The Board may also be asked to provide advice and recommendations on other EM program components. The Board also provides an avenue to fulfill public participation requirements outlined in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Federal Facility Agreements, Consent Orders, Consent Decrees and Settlement Agreements.

Tentative Agenda: (agenda topics are subject to change; please contact Juanita Campbell at juanita.campbell@srs.gov for the most current agenda)

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public and public comment can be given orally or in writing. Fifteen minutes are allocated during the meeting for public comment and those wishing to make oral comment will be given a minimum of two minutes to speak. Written comments received at least two working days prior to the meeting will be provided to the members and included in the meeting minutes. Written comments received within two working days after the meeting will be included in the minutes. For additional information on public comment and to submit written comment, please contact srscitizensadvisoryboard@srs.gov. The EM SSAB, Savannah River Site, welcomes the attendance of the public at its meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact srscitizensadvisoryboard@srs.gov at least seven days in advance of the meeting.

Meeting conduct: The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Questioning of board members or presenters by the public is not permitted.

Minutes: Minutes will be available at the following website: srscitizensadvisoryboard@srs.gov.

Signing Authority: This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 15, 2025, by Alyssa Petit, Deputy Committee Management Officer, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2025-0039, at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit to the EPA's docket at https://www.regulations.gov any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission ( i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). Please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets for additional submission methods; the full EPA public comment policy; information about CBI, PBI, or multimedia submissions; and general guidance on making effective comments.

Congress appropriates funding for specifically named community water infrastructure projects known as Community Project Funding (CPF)/Congressionally Directed Spending (CDS) items, known hereafter as Community Grants Program projects. These Community Grants Program projects are identified on an annual basis in Annual Appropriation Acts and the grant authority for the program is identified within the Annual Appropriations Acts themselves. The Annual Appropriations Acts direct funding towards these projects, which are designated for the planning, design, and construction of drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure, and water quality protection projects. For a project to be eligible for Community Grants Program funding, the project must be identified in the Annual Appropriations Acts.

The proposed federal action under consideration in this PEA is approving or denying Community Grants Program applications by either awarding or not awarding the Community Grants Program funding. In the PEA, the EPA analyzed the potential adverse and beneficial environmental impacts of the issuance of grant funding for the planning, design, and construction of eligible drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure projects, and water quality protection projects. The PEA presents a broad and high-level review of information on a nationwide basis on existing conditions and discusses potential impacts and mitigation measures that might typically occur during construction and operation of broad project types.

The environmental review process, which is documented by the PEA, indicates that no potential significant adverse environmental impacts are anticipated from the proposed action. Based on the environmental impact analysis in the PEA, the EPA has determined that no significant environmental impacts are anticipated from the issuance of funding under the Community Grants Program and the proposed action does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, making the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) unnecessary. Therefore, the EPA is issuing a preliminary FONSI.

An electronic copy of the PEA and preliminary FONSI (EPA No. N2025023) are available for download from EPA's NEPA Compliance Database at https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/nepa/details?nepaId=503414.

This action is directed to the public in general and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, contact the Chemical Review Manager identified in table 1 of this document.

Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment. For additional background on the registration review program, see: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.

EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed in this document pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., and 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. FIFRA section 3(g) provides, among other things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in or on food.

Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58(c), this document announces the availability of EPA's interim registration review decision for the pesticide listed in table 1 of this unit. The interim registration review decision is supported by rationales included in the docket established for each chemical undergoing registration review.

Consistent with 40 CFR 155.58(a), EPA posted a proposed interim decision for dicrotophos and invited the public to submit any comments or new information (89 FR 52457, June 24, 2024 (FRL-11989-01-OCSPP)). EPA considered and responded to any comments or information received during the public comment period in the respective registration review interim decision.

Consistent with 40 CFR 155.57, in its final registration review decision, EPA will ultimately determine whether a pesticide continues to meet the registration standard in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)).

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

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

OMB Control Number: 3060-0710.

Title: Policy and Rules Under Parts 1 and 51 Concerning the Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC Docket No. 96-98.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 462 respondents; 2,967 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 1-500 hours.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections: 1-4, 201-205, 214, 224, 251, 252, and 303 (r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 601 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 224, 251, 252, 303 (r), and 601.

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

Total Annual Burden: 37,390 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: This collection will be submitted as a revision of a currently approved collection to OMB in order to obtain the full three-year clearance. The Commission adopted rules to implement the First Report and Order on Reconsideration issued in CC Docket No. 96-98. That Order implemented parts of sections 251 and 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that affect local competition. Incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) are required to, among other things, offer interconnection, unbundled network elements (UNEs), and wholesale rates for certain services to new entrants. ILECs must price such services and rates that are cost-based and just and reasonable.

All principal campaign committees of candidates who participate in the Texas Special General Election shall file a 12-day Pre-General Report on October 23, 2025. If there is a majority winner, committees must also file a Post-General Report on December 4, 2025. (See charts below for the closing date for each report.)

Note that these reports are in addition to the campaign committee's regular quarterly filings. (See charts below for the closing date for each report).

Political committees not filing monthly are subject to special election reporting if they make previously undisclosed contributions or expenditures in connection with the Texas Special General Election by the close of books for the applicable report(s). (See charts below for the closing date for each report.)

Committees filing monthly that make contributions or expenditures in connection with the Texas Special General Election will continue to file according to the monthly reporting schedule.

Additional disclosure information for the Texas special election may be found on the FEC website at https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/dates-and-deadlines/.

In the event that no candidate receives a majority of the votes in the Special General Election, a Special Runoff Election will be held. The Commission will publish a future notice giving the filing dates for that election if it becomes necessary.

Principal campaign committees, party committees and leadership PACs that are otherwise required to file reports in connection with the special election must simultaneously file FEC Form 3L if they receive two or more bundled contributions from lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs that aggregate in excess of $23,300 during the special election reporting periods. (See charts below for closing date of each period.) 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(v), (b), 110.17(e)(2), (f).

The Federal Maritime Commission is updating the list of controlled carriers to add an entity that qualifies as a controlled carrier. The Shipping Act of 1984, as amended (Shipping Act), defines a “controlled carrier” as an ocean common carrier that is, or whose operating assets are, directly or indirectly owned or controlled by a government. 46 U.S.C. 40102(9). Ownership or control by a government is deemed to exist for a carrier if (1) a majority of the interest in the carrier is owned or controlled in any manner by that government, an agency of that government, or a public or private person controlled by that government, or (2) that government has the right to appoint or disapprove the appointment of a majority of the directors, the chief operating officer, or the chief executive officer of the carrier. Id.; 46 CFR 565.2(a).

As required by the Shipping Act, controlled carriers are subject to enhanced oversight by the Commission. For example, 46 U.S.C. 40701(b) provides that the Commission may, after providing notice and opportunity for a hearing, prohibit the publication or use of a rate, charge, classification, rule, or regulation that a controlled carrier has failed to demonstrate is just and reasonable. See 46 U.S.C. 40701(b). In addition, 46 U.S.C. 40502(f) provides that in an action for a breach of a service contract, the dispute resolution forum cannot in any way be controlled by or affiliated with a controlled carrier or by the government that owns or controls the carrier. See 46 U.S.C. 40502(f). Congress enacted these protections to ensure that controlled carriers, whose marketplace decision making can be influenced by foreign governmental priorities or by their access to non-market sources of capital, do not engage in unreasonable below-market pricing practices, which could disrupt trade or harm privately-owned shipping companies.

The controlled carrier list is not a comprehensive list of foreign-owned or controlled ships or shipowners; rather, it is only a list of ocean common carriers that are controlled by governments. See 46 U.S.C. 40102(9); see also 46 U.S.C. 40102(18) (providing that the term “ocean common carrier” means a vessel-operating common carrier.). Thus, tramp operators and other non-common carriers are not included, nor are non-vessel-operating common carriers, regardless of their ownership or control.

The controlled carrier list was last updated on July 18, 2024. See 89 FR 58374. This notice revises the list to add Chinese-Polish Joint Stock Shipping Company (“Chipolbrok”) as a controlled carrier of the government of the People's Republic of China. Accordingly, Chipolbrok is now subject to the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 40701-40706, and to the Commission's regulations relating to controlled carriers. It is also subject to the provisions of 46 U.S.C. 40502(f).

There are no changes to report with respect to the remaining controlled carriers on the list.

It is requested that any other information regarding possible omissions or inaccuracies in this list be provided to the Commission's Office of the General Counsel at GeneralCounsel@fmc.gov. See 46 CFR 501.12.

The amended list of currently classified controlled carriers and their corresponding Commission-issued Registered Persons Index numbers is set forth below:

(1) COSCO SHIPPING Lines Co., Ltd. (RPI No. 015614)—People's Republic of China;

(2) Orient Overseas Container Line Limited (RPI No. 011398)—People's Republic of China;

(3) OOCL (Europe) Limited (RPI No. 024786)—People's Republic of China;

(4) Hede (HONGKONG) International Shipping Limited (RPI No. 033332)—People's Republic of China;

(5) HMM (RPI No. 001452)—Republic of Korea;

(6) Anji Shipping Co., Ltd. (RPI No. 033604)—People's Republic of China;

(7) Chinese-Polish Joint Stock Shipping Company (RPI No. 020107)—People's Republic of China.

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 Shelburne 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 seven cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The one associated funerary object is a pair of death moccasins. The six sacred objects are two umbilical cord cases, a war club, a ceremonial shirt, and two whistles. Between 1880 and 1900, Ogden Pleissner collected six of these cultural items from the central plains. In 1961, the Shelburne Museum acquired the cultural items from Pleissner. The ceremonial shirt was acquired from an educational Move Kit in 1989. The cultural items are attributed to the Tsitsitas/Suhtai (Cheyenne). Heavy metals, including arsenic and mercury were documented in pigments when a sample of 99 items was tested in March 2021 with a pXRF (pXRF, or portable x-ray florescence, collects data on the chemical composition of items, in a manner that is non-destructive). We have no record of pesticide use by any of our donors. Museum staff have occasionally used naphthalene and/or para-dichlorobenzene, in the form of mothballs, and dichlorvos (DDVP) in the form of Shell No-Pest Strips, however we have no records of them being used with Native American items.

The Shelburne 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 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 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.

• The six sacred objects described in this notice are specific ceremonial objects needed by a traditional Native American religious leader for present-day adherents to practice traditional Native American religion, according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Shelburne Museum 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 Shelburne 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.

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, 21 individuals were collected at the Office of Indian Affairs, Field Service, Nome Census Area, AK. The human remains are hair clippings collected from two individuals who were recorded as being 60 years old, three individuals who were recorded as being 45 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 42 years old, three individuals who were recorded as being 40 years old, one individual who was recorded as being between 35-40 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 38 years old, three individuals who were recorded as being 35 years old, two individuals who were recorded as being 32 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 31 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 30 years old, one individual who was recorded as being 29 years old, two individuals who were recorded as being 16 years old and identified as “Eskimo.” Virgil P. Dickson took the hair clippings at the Office of Indian Affairs, Field Service between 1930 and 1933. Dickson 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 an Unknown Location, Northwest Arctic Borough, AK. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being between 40-45 years old and identified as “Eskimo.” Frank Daugherty took the hair clippings at the Unknown Location between 1930 and 1933. Daugherty 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 Chemawa (Salem) Indian School, Marion County, OR. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 21 years old and identified as “Eskimo.” James T. Ryan took the hair clippings at the Chemawa (Salem) Indian School between 1930 and 1933. Ryan 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 23 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Chinik Eskimo Community (Golovin); King Island Native Community; Native Village of Ambler; Native Village of Brevig Mission; Native Village of Buckland; Native Village of Council; Native Village of Deering; Native Village of Diomede (aka Inalik); Native Village of Elim; Native Village of Gambell; Native Village of Kiana; Native Village of Kobuk; Native Village of Koyuk; Native Village of Mary's Igloo; Native Village of Noatak; Native Village of Saint Michael; Native Village of Savoonga; Native Village of Selawik; Native Village of Shaktoolik; Native Village of Shishmaref; Native Village of Shungnak; Native Village of Teller; Native Village of Wales; Native Village of White Mountain; Nome Eskimo Community; Noorvik Native Community; Stebbins Community Association; and the Village of Solomon.

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 May 19, 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.

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 UWM, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, 31 individuals have been reasonably identified. The 18 associated funerary objects are one large clam shell cup or tool; one lot of faunal bone; one lot of grit tempered ceramic sherds; one lot of pottery; one lot of Middle Woodland period pottery; one lot of ceramic sherds; one lot of mixed material including faunal bone, charcoal, and lithics; one lot of mixed material including faunal bone, charcoal, groundstone, lithics, rocks, and pottery; 10 lots of mixed material including shell fragments, lithic debitage, ceramic sherds, faunal bone, pottery, and historic material. The individuals and associated funerary objects were removed from the Pipe Site Complex, Fond du Lac County, WI on several different occasions between 1958 and 1997. The Pipe Site Complex consists of two sites: the Pipe Site (47FD0010) and Camp Shaginappi (47FD0013).

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

UWM has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 31 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 18 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma; Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan; Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin; Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma; and the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, UWO must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. UWO is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the University of California San Diego, 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 three cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The three objects of cultural patrimony are three historical ledger books drawings, The two Kiowa-Finley ledgers were collected by Walter Lowrie Finley, 2nd Lieutenant, 9th Cavalry while stationed at Fort Sill during 11/19/1881 to 7/16/1883. The original author was identified as Kiowa but not named.

The Koba-Russell sketchbook was given to Miss Josephine Russell in 1876 by Captain Richard H. Pratt, Commander of Fort Marion in St. Augustine, Florida. Koba, the original Kiowa author, was one of 72 warriors from a number of Plains Indian tribes imprisoned in 1875 at Fort Marion, the old Spanish fortress in St. Augustine, Florida. Miss Russell served as a volunteer school-mistress at Fort Marion, providing instruction for the Plains Indian warriors imprisoned there from 1875 to 1878. The three items were donated to the University of California San Diego at a later time.

The University of California San Diego has determined that:

• The three 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.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of California San Diego 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 San Diego 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 Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences 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 item is known as catalog number C478. Museum catalog records indicate this is a ceramic vessel with a long neck and indentations on the shoulder. The ceramic is shell tempered. This funerary object was known to be part of a larger burial-ceremonial complex at Moundville, in Hale and Tuscaloosa Counties, Alabama. Moundville is culturally affiliated to the Muskogean language speaking Tribes. Accession records indicate that C478 was removed from Mound D at Moundville in Hale County Alabama. Collected by Chauncey W. Riggs and acquired by the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences in 1891.

The Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences has determined that:

• The one unassociated funerary object 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 Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences 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 Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences 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 University of California, Riverside, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, one individual has been reasonably identified. The seven associated funerary objects are one lot of ceramic sherds, one lot of ceramic objects, one lot of glass, one lot of lithics, one lot of metal objects, one lot of fire-altered rock, and one lot of faunal bone. In 1971, archaeologists at the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) learned from Gerry Smith of the San Bernardino County Museum that archaeological site CA-RIV-399 (the Painted Rock Site) at the base of the Lakeview Mountains in Riverside County was being disturbed by the construction of a canal. Tom King, Chief Archaeologist for the UCRARU, surveyed the site and noted artifacts on the surface including quartz flakes and clay pipe fragments. To prevent further damage to the site, archaeologists from the UCRARU were given permission by property owners to run a student archaeological field school in the summer of 1971. The site was described by archaeologists as an extensive occupation area with milling features and rock art. Students excavated twelve 1 x 1-meter units and uncovered approximately 135 items including sherds, lithics, fire-altered rock, and other archaeological materials. The objects were housed at UCR under accession number 24. In 2024, at the request of tribal partners, an osteologist reviewed a burnt bone fragment in the collection and concluded that it represented a human infant cranial bone. In consultation with tribal partners, the objects in the collection were also reviewed and identified as associated funerary objects based on expert tribal knowledge.

The Painted Rocks Site is an area well-known to the local Cahuilla and Luiseno Tribes as a place where their ancestors lived; it remains a place of great importance for them in modern times.

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

The University of California, Riverside has determined that:

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

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

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, California and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of California, Riverside must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of California, Riverside is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

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

Prior to 1906, 979 lots of associated funerary objects were removed from San Nicolas Island, California by several individuals and donated to the Lowie Museum of Anthropology (now known by Phoebe A Hearst Museum) at the University of California, Berkeley. The 979 lots of associated funerary objects are atlatls, awls, basketry, bone figurine, bone knives, bone needles, bone ornaments, bone pendants, bone scrapers, bone swords, bone tools (one missing), bone tubes, cartridges, charcoal samples, chipped-stone crescents, clubs, comals, cordage, drills, faunal remains (18 missing), fish hooks, flakes, flutes, ground stone, hammerstones, harpoons, knives, mineral and rock samples (one missing), mortars (two missing), painting supplies, pebbles, pestles, plummets, projectile points (one missing), scrapers, shell beads, shell dishes, shell ornaments (one missing), shell pendants, sinkers, soil samples, spearheads, stone beads, stone bowls, stone dishes, stone ornaments, stone pendants, stone pipes (one missing), stone tools, stone tubes, stone vessels, weights, whistles, wood fragments, wood tools, worked bone, worked shell, and worked stone (one missing).

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.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is reasonably identified by the geographical location or acquisition history of the associated funerary objects described in this notice.

The University of California, Berkeley has determined that:

• The 979 lots of associated funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a connection between the associated funerary objects described in this notice and the La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians, California; Pala Band of Mission Indians; Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation, California; Pechanga Band of Indians ( previously listed as Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California); Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of Rincon Reservation, California; Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of the Santa Ynez Reservation, California; and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 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 associated funerary objects 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.

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 San Bernardino County 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 57 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. These include 55 lots of objects of cultural patrimony and two lots of unassociated funerary objects.

The 31 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are one lot of stone bowls, one lot of a steatite bowl, one lot of spindle whorls, one lot of a pencil, one lot of manos, one lot of pestles, one lot of a metal knife, one lot of wood fragments, one lot of seeds, one lot of siltstone tablets, one lot of glass bottle stoppers, one lot of burned pot sherds, one lot of ground stone, one lot of arrow shaft straighteners, one lot of charcoal, one lot of lithic flakes, one lot of lithic points, one lot of unworked faunal bone, one lot of pot sherds, one lot of porcelain fragments, one lot of shell pendant fragments, one lot of unworked shell, one lot of shell beads, one lot of clay pipe fragments, one lot of glass bottle fragments, one lot of a ceramic figurine of a human body, one lot of buttons, one lot of metal fragments, one lot of metal nails, one lot of shell casings, and one lot of bone awls. These objects from Muscupaibit, Camp Cajon (SBCM-2) were collected as early as 1949.

The one lot of unassociated funerary objects are one lot of burned shell beads. These objects from Muscupaibit, Camp Cajon (SBCM-2) were collected as early as 1949.

The 22 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are one lot of a metate, one lot of a spindle whorls, one lot of a pestle, one lot of ground stone, one lot of lithic flakes, one lot of lithic points, one lot of shell beads, one lot of unworked faunal bone, one lot of pot sherds, one lot of an arrow shaft straightener, one lot of plastic, one lot of seeds, one lot of a wooden stick, one lot of unworked shell, one lot of plant material, one lot of fire-affected rock, one lot of charcoal, one lot of bone awls, one lot of metal, one lot of a manuport (A64-214), one lot of a ceramic fishing weight, and one lot of a green slate pendant. These objects from Las Flores Ranch (SBCM-13) may have been collected as early as 1939. In 1970, the Archaeological Survey Association (ASA) began collecting from Las Flores Ranch.

The one lot of unassociated funerary objects are one lot of burned shell beads. This object from Las Flores Ranch (SBCM-13) may have been collected as early as 1939. In 1970, the Archaeological Survey Association (ASA) began collecting from Las Flores Ranch.

The two lots of objects of cultural patrimony are one lot of ground stone and one lot of lithic flakes. These objects from Hesperia Rd (SBCM-47) were collected in 1939 by Gerald A. Smith.

San Bernardino County Museum has determined that:

• The 55 objects of cultural patrimony 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 two 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 Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation ( previously listed as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, 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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, San Bernardino County Museum 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. San Bernardino County 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 Field 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 64 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 64 unassociated funerary objects are bowls, jars, mugs, ladles, and a fossilized wood arrow point. In 1897, 64 cultural items were removed from the site of Homolovi II in Navajo County, AZ. These items were taken by George A. Dorsey for the Field Museum during an archaeological expedition to Homolovi and were accessioned in 1898. Homolovi II was occupied from 1350 C.E. to 1400 C.E. Based on consultation, academic research, and Museum records, Homolovi II is affiliated with the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico. There is no known presence of any potentially hazardous substances.

The Field Museum has determined that:

• The 64 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 Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Field Museum 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 Field 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 Bureau of Indian Affairs, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in its inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Human remains representing at least 11 individuals have been identified. The 157 associated funerary objects are 22 lots of groundstone, 20 lots of lithics, 49 lots of ceramic sherds, 11 lots of “historic artifacts,” two lots of lightning stones, eight lots of unmodified stone, six lots of ceramic vessels, five lots of ornamental objects, five lots of pipes, three lots of minerals, one lot of “shatter,” four lots of botanical objects, 11 lots of fauna, one lot of a figurine, one lot of unworked wood, one lot of a ceramic disc, two lots of architectural remains, one lot of fossils, two lots of cloud blowers, and two lots of “indeterminate.” The Museum of New Mexico (MNM) conducted an archaeological salvage excavation at Nambe Pueblo (LA17) from June 16 to July 8, 1966. Ceramics located at the site reveal an occupation no earlier than A.D. 1200 and suggest a continued occupation of the site into the Historic Period. Additional human remains were donated to the Museum by a private individual who collected the human remains in 1964 from Powakwaiouinge Ruin, across from the creek from Nambe Pueblo.

Archaeological reports and oral history both confirm that this site and LA 17 are culturally affiliated with the Nambe Pueblo. There are no known chemical treatments for the objects, minus the possible application of some labeling material that is a thermoplastic resin.

Based on the information available and the results of the consultation, cultural affiliation is clearly identified by the information available about the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and by the geographical location or acquisition history of the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 11 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 157 objects are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Pueblo of Nambe, New Mexico.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Bureau of Indian Affairs must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

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

Human remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified from the Unknown Name, Lemon Bay (8SoUn.1), in Sarasota County, Florida. There are no associated funerary objects from the site. This site is a small shell midden on Lemon Bay in the northern part of Englewood, Sarasota County, Florida. This collection includes the cranium of an Ancestor that was presented by Fred Kruea on September 9, 1959.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is clearly identified by the information available about the human remains described in this notice to be associated with the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

The University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History 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 University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

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

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, one individual has been reasonably identified. The 166 associated funerary objects are trade beads. The individual and the trade beads were excavated and collected in 1984 by Historical Research Associates, Inc. from the Wapato Portage (45-CL-4) site on Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. The items are curated at Portland State University (PSU). In 2021, the collection was reanalyzed, and the individual was identified co-mingled with non-human faunal bone. In addition, according to Native American traditional knowledge for this region, trade beads were commonly used as funerary objects.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is reasonably identified by the geographical location or acquisition history of the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice.

The Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex has determined that:

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

• The 166 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon and the Cowlitz Indian Tribe.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

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

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, one individual has been reasonably identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The individual was discovered on or about 10 September 2021 on Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge in Jefferson County, Washington. A private citizen who was kayaking stopped on a small island and collected a single bone that was exposed on the surface of the site, concerned that it may be part of a crime scene. They submitted the bone to the Jefferson County Sherriff's Office, who determined the remains did not belong to a recent crime scene. The bone was turned over to the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's physical anthropologist, who determined that the individual is of Native American ancestry, and that the bone was from a previously known Native American archaeological site which has a previously recorded cemetery (45JE11). Officials at the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge were informed and engaged in Consultation with culturally affiliated Tribes.

The Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex has determined that:

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

• The Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe; Lower Elwha Tribal Community; Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe; Puyallup Tribe the Puyallup Reservation; Samish Indian Nation; Skokomish Indian Tribe; Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Madison Reservation; and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community have priority for disposition of the human remains described in this notice.

Written claims for disposition of the human remains in this notice must be sent to the authorized representative identified in this notice under ADDRESSES . If no claim for disposition is received by April 20, 2026 the human remains in this notice will become unclaimed human remains. 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 described in this notice may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing claims for disposition are received, the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex must determine the most appropriate claimant prior to disposition. Requests for joint disposition of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 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 Turtle Bay Exploration Park, 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 object of cultural patrimony is a lumjawi/canoe fashioned of a single log of ponderosa pine by burning and adzing. It has a metal plate on one bow covering a damaged area and bolt and nut with a chain on the opposite bow.

The lumjawi/canoe was found on Rising River Ranch which was purchased by Bing and Kathryn Crosby in 1959 and managed by Leonard William Meyer Jr. In 1978, Mr. Crosby passed away and Rising River Ranch was sold. In April 1982, Mr. Meyer brought the canoe to the Redding Museum and Art Center (TBEP's predecessor institution) and it was accessioned into the collection in May 1982.

Rising River is in Shasta County of northern California. Rising River feeds into Hat Creek approximately ten miles east of the town of Cassel and in part of what is considered the Pit River Drainage, which has been Ajumawi territory since time immemorial. The Ajumawi Band is one of the eleven autonomous bands of the Pit River Tribe (includes XL Ranch, Big Bend, Likely, Lookout, Montgomery Creek, and Roaring Creek Rancherias).

Museum documentation indicates the lumjawi/canoe was stored outside without protection until it arrived at the Museum. Oral history suggests it was serviceable at Rising River Lake in the late 1920s, but in the 1940s, it was observed listing to one side and partially filled with silt. It was taken out of the water and stored on land until the early 1970s when it was placed on blocks to prevent insect infestation.

Upon arrival to the Museum, the item was found to be infested with moss, lichen, fungi, and various insects, along with significant staining and deterioration. In order to exhibit the canoe, cleaning and conservation was required. The treatments were completed by professional conservators Dr. Arno Schniewind and Dale Paul Kronkright. They used hand dental tools to remove lichen and algae, and applied airbrasive cleaning to the exterior. Airbrasive cleaning is a method of dry cleaning mechanically by means of a grit spraying unit. Powdered abrasives can include calcium magnesium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, glass beads, and several grades of aluminum oxide. Silicon carbide powder is used occasionally for very hard corrosion products on metal. The specific powdered abrasives used were not documented. Samples of the wood were removed from the artifact and sent to a lab to determine the best consolidant.

Due to its size, material, and fragility, the lumjawi/canoe was placed in a specially constructed tank for consolidation treatment. A recirculating pump and spray outlets allowed for continuous diffusion of a 13% solution of AYAF in methanol into the wood. AYAF is a polyvinyl acetate resin used for conservation. The canoe was put on display in the Museum in October 1982 and remains on display to this day. The methanol used during treatment has since evaporated, and AYAF is not considered hazardous.

Turtle Bay Exploration Park has determined that:

• The one object of cultural patrimony described in this notice has ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native 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 Pit River Tribe, California (includes XL Ranch, Big Bend, Likely, Lookout, Montgomery Creek, and Roaring Creek Rancherias).

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Turtle Bay Exploration Park 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. Turtle Bay Exploration Park 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 University of California, Riverside, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in the summary or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

A total of 69 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 69 objects of cultural patrimony are 14 lots of ceramic sherds, 13 lots of lithics, nine lots of animal bone, seven lots of unmodified shell, four lots of geological materials, three lots of glass objects, two lots of metal objects, three lots of shell beads, five lots of botanical materials, one lot of organic material, two lots of fire altered rock, one metate, one modified animal bone, two manos, one lots of polished stone objects, and one stone sucking tube.

In 1971, the UCR Archaeological Research Unit was contracted to conduct an archaeological inventory of the Palm Hills Area. UCR Archaeologists, James Kelly and Thomas King led the project which consisted of a survey of Palm Canyon, Andreas Canyon, Murray Canyon, and Asbestos Spring. A total of 29 sites recorded and 335 cultural items were collected from the surface of various sites including ceramic sherds, lithic objects, animal bone, unmodified shell, and geological materials. The materials were subsequently housed at UCR under accession number 35.

In 1984, the UCR Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted to conduct an archaeological assessment and field-survey of a property in the Palm Canyon area near Palm Springs, California. The project, ARU #770, was led by Daniel McCarthy and Philip Wilke. The archaeological assessment of the site revealed a scattering of ceramic sherds, as well as a historic dump site with old-style solder cans and broken glass. The excavation of one 1x1 meter unit recovered Native American pottery fragments, square nails, glazed crockery, glazed sherds (of Chinese origin), two buttons, and some rusted metal fragments likely representing a metal container. The materials were subsequently housed at the University of California, Riverside under accession number 44.

In 1978, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted a cultural resource assessment on a parcel of land located on the northwest edge of the city of Indian Wells ahead of a development project. The project, ARU #300, was led by James Swenson and consisted of a field-survey and the collection of surface materials. Archaeological site CA-RIV-1315 was recorded during the project. Archaeologists believed that it may be the western edge of archaeological site CA-RIV-64, which represents the ancestral Cahuilla village of Pal Kavinish. Materials including ceramics, lithics, shells beads, faunal bone, and unmodified shell were collected during the assessment and subsequently housed at UCR under accession number 60.

In 1980, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted an archaeological assessment of 880 acres of land located at the foot of the Santa Rosa Mountains ahead of a development project. The project, UCRARU #574, was led by Alan Davis, James Swenson, and Philip Wilke. The archaeologists relocated a previously recorded site, CA-RIV-1336, and located three more prehistoric sites. During the assessment, a field survey was conducted with the collection of surface materials which were housed at UCR under accession number 80. Archaeologists described these sites as the location of prehistoric weir fishing activities with the presence of scatter of Tizon Brown Ware ceramic sherds, stone house rings, and extensive concentrations of stone structures thought to be prehistoric fish weirs. Materials recovered from the sites included ceramics, lithics, and faunal bone.

In 1989, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) evaluated archaeological sites CA-RIV-2195 and CA-RIV-2196 ahead of proposed land development. The project, UCRARU #1006, was led by Daniel McCarthy and Philip Wilke. Archaeologists identified and relocated two archaeological sites. The archaeologists described the site of CA- RIV-2195 as a scatter of fifteen fire-cracked rock fragments, twenty potsherds, one piece of shell, and several pieces of fire clay. They described CA-RIV-2196 as 16 areas of concentrated broken rock, pottery, or fragments of non-human bone. Surface materials were collected and housed at UCR under accession number 145. The site was later revisited by UCRARU to conduct test excavations of the area. The excavation recovered pottery fragments, a single mano fragment, faunal remains, a metate, and several manos. This collection of surface materials was housed at UCR under accession number 145.

In 1990, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Unit (UCRARU) conducted an archaeological assessment on a right-of-way corridor located in the City of La Quinta at the request of the Transpacific Development Company, ahead of the Washington Plaza project. The assessment consisted of a field survey during which archaeologists recorded one archaeological site, CA-RIV-3679. The site was later revisited in 1992 by UCRARU and conducted an additional on-foot survey along with test excavations at nearby archaeological site CA-RIV-2200. Cultural objects including ceramics, glass, lithics, shell beads, animal bone, floral materials, geological materials, unmodified shell, and fire-altered rock were collected from the site and housed at UCR under accession numbers 146, 211, and 212.

In 1989, the University of California, Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted a reevaluation of several archaeological sites ahead of a development project. The project, UCRARU #1014, was led by Daniel McCarthy and Philip Wilke and consisted of a foot survey of 80 acres of land, archaeological mapping, surface collection, and test excavation. Archaeologists examined three prehistoric sites on the property, with the largest concentration of artifacts present at CA-RIV-1769. They described this site as consisting of a large hearth area exposed by deflation on top of a dune formation with the presence of charcoal, ash, numerous pieces of fish, bird, and small mammal bone, shell, ceramic shreds, debitage, a bone awl tip, and Olivella shell bead. Eleven 1m x 1.5m test units were excavated and yielded a total of 135 artifacts including animal bone, ceramics, lithics, shell beads, floral material, unmodified shell, ceramics. These objects were housed at UCR under accession numbers 147, 148, and 149.

In 1992, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted to oversee the development of land near the Whitewater River Channel near La Quinta. Archaeologists noted that project was near known archaeological sites. During the monitoring cultural objects were recovered from archaeological site CA-RIV-3683 including debitage, potsherds, ground stone, fire-affected rocks and daub, two projectile points, and one broken pestle. They were housed at UCR under accession number 152.

In 1990, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted archaeological investigations at five prehistoric sites located in the City of La Quinta. The project, UCRARU #1044, was led by Brooke Arkush. The investigation consisted of archaeological mapping, surface collection, and the excavation of two test units. Archaeologists described this site as consisting of a small ceramic scatter on a small sand ridge. Excavation and surface collections were housed at UCR under accession number 165. During the same project, cremated human remains were found at nearby archaeological site CA-RIV-3144.

In November 1990, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted to assess land in the Coachella Valley ahead of a development project. The assessment consisted of a survey during which archaeologists recorded 17 isolated finds and archaeological site CA-RIV-4090. Items recovered during the survey included ceramic sherds, faunal bone, burnt daub, lithics, floral materials, geological materials, unmodified shell, and fire-altered rock, which were housed at UCR under accession number 168.

In 1991, the University of California, Archaeological Research Unit was contracted to assess a parcel of land that was proposed to be developed for a new civic center and baseball field in the city of Palm Desert. Archaeologists conducted an on-foot survey and recorded archaeological site CA-RIV-4157, which consisted of a scatter of ceramics and lithic flakes. The materials were collected and housed at the University of California, Riverside under accession number 204.

In 2022, a large metate was found in the University of California, Riverside's archaeological collections with a label reading “CA-RIV-112”. No record of the metate could be found in UCR's original accession records. Site records describe the site as a possible camp. An additional collection from the site was reported to have been housed at the Riverside Municipal Museum (RMM) under accession numbers A929-1 through 775. Other objects reportedly noted at the site include metates, manos, projectile points, and scrapers. Although no burials were noted on the site records, the recorder noted that teeth and mandibles were reported in the RMM collection. The circumstances surrounding UCR's acquirement of the metate are unknown and it is unclear if it came from the RMM collection. It was assigned the new accession number 405 in 2022 after being discovered in the collections.

In 1977, the County of Riverside, Department of Airports contracted the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) to survey large portions of the Thermal Airport property that was being proposed for agricultural development. The property is located near the historic Cahuilla village of La Mesa and large archaeological sites were recorded in 1951 in the northwestern portion of the airport land. During their survey of the property, UCRARU archaeologists located archaeological site CA-RIV-148. The site consisted of pot sherd scatters, multiple human cremations, middens, hearths, and large metates. UCRARU report #209 does not mention the removal of any artifacts from the site, however, in 2023, UCR NAGPRA Program staff discovered an animal bone flute, lithics flakes, a projectile point, and 6 ceramic sherds labelled “CA-RIV-148”. The objects were subsequently assigned UCR accession number 424 and are assumed to have been collected during the 1977 project.

In 1978, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted to assess 11 acres of land in Indian Wells that was scheduled for residential development. The archaeological investigation was led by Jim Swenson and consisted of a field survey and surface collection of artifacts including a mano, ceramic sherds, lithic flakes, and faunal bone. During the project archaeologists recorded archaeological site CA-RIV-1455, which they described as light scatters of potsherds. The site is about a mile east from archaeological sites CA-RIV-1315 and CA-RIV-64, which are known to the Cahuilla as the ancestral village of Pal Kavinish.

In 1991, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted a field survey of approximately 20 acres of land near Thermal to determine if any archaeological resources might be impacted by future development of unincorporated areas. ARU Report #1123 indicates that no archaeological sites were located during the survey, however, in 2024 UCR NAGPRA Program staff found 3 lithic objects labelled “CA-RIV-4113, ARU 1123” in the University's collections. The objects are one highly polished mano and two highly polished, long and thin lithic objects. The objects were assigned UCR accession number 446.

In 1990, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted by an animal sanctuary in Mountain Center, California, to reevaluate a large archaeological site located in the sanctuary. The site, CA-RIV-1935, was first recorded in 1980 by UCR archaeology students and was described as being a significant site with pictographs, milling features, and numerous surface artifacts like polished bone, projectiles points, and manos. The 1990 evaluation was led by Robert Yohe III and consisted of an on-foot survey to locate the boundaries of the site. During the survey a steatite pipe or sucking tube and a quartz projectile point were noted on the surface of the site, but were not reported to have been collected. In 2024, however, UCR NAGPRA Program staff found the sucking tube, projectile point, and two glass trade beads in a box labelled “CA-RIV-1935”. The objects were assigned UCR accession number 452.

In 1972, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) conducted a survey of two areas on lower Mission Creek ahead of proposed flood control measures. During the ground survey, archaeologists located two archaeological sites. The first site, CA-RIV-1294, was described as the ruins of a historic home; the second site, CA-RIV-1119, was described as a scatter of ceramic sherds. ARU Report #56 does not note the recovery of any artifacts, however, in 2023 UCR NAGPRA Program staff found two arrowheads and two flakes labelled “CA-RIV-1119, CA-RIV-1249” in the University's collections.

In 1989, the University of California, Riverside Archaeological Research Unit (UCRARU) was contracted to conduct an archaeological assessment of land south of Mission Creek. During the assessment, archaeologists identified three archaeological sites; CA-RIV-3658, -3656-H, and -3657-H. Sites -3656-H and 3657-H were described as historic camp sites associated with a nearby mining or well shaft. Archaeological site CA-RIV-3658 was described as an isolated prehistoric milling slick. No artifacts were reported to have been collected during the assessment, however, UCR NAGPRA Program staff discovered one ceramic potsherd labelled “CA-RIV-3658 nearby isolate (Mission Creek area).

The University of California, Riverside has determined that:

• The 69 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.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, California; Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, California; Cabazon Band of Cahuilla Indians ( previously listed as Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, California); Cahuilla Band of Indians; Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians, California; Ramona Band of Cahuilla, California; Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, California; and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, 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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of California, Riverside must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of California, Riverside is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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 Turtle Bay Exploration Park, 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 113 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 113 objects of cultural patrimony include 12 stone tools and stone tool fragments, three bone needles, nine turtle shell fragments, 88 pieces of animal bone fragments, and one lot of fish bones.

Museum documentation states these items were found or excavated by Jim Dotta near Big Lake or McArthur in Shasta County in northern California. Though these items share a site number with which they are all associated, there is no archaeological report on file at the Museum. Mr. Dotta estimated the manos and metate to be 2,000 years old. There is no date information for the remaining items. There is no indication any of the items are from a burial context. Mr. Dotta was usually meticulous about noting the presence or absence of a burial in relation to artifacts. However, this collection came to the Redding Museum after his death and records may be incomplete. The areas of Big Lake and McArthur have been Ajumawi territory since time immemorial. The Ajumawi Band is one of eleven autonomous bands of the Pit River Tribe (includes XL Ranch, Big Bend, Likely, Lookout, Montgomery Creek, and Roaring Creek Rancherias).

James “Jim” Dotta was a local instructor at Shasta Community College in Redding, CA, a professional archaeologist, and heavily involved in the Redding Museum and Art Center (TBEP's predecessor institution). He was also an avid collector of books, historical objects, artworks, and Indigenous Belongings. Mr. Dotta donated the metate and two manos to the Museum in 1979. The remaining items were donated in 1982 by his family after Mr. Dotta passed away. Turtle Bay Exploration Park does not treat Indigenous Belongings with hazardous materials. However, it is not documented whether these items received treatment prior to entering the care of the Redding Museum and Art Center.

Turtle Bay Exploration Park has determined that:

• The 113 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.

• There is a reasonable connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Pit River Tribe, California (includes XL Ranch, Big Bend, Likely, Lookout, Montgomery Creek, and Roaring Creek Rancherias).

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Turtle Bay Exploration Park 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 Turtle Bay Exploration Park 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 Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in its inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Based on the information available, human remains representing, at least, one individual has been reasonably identified. The individual was discovered on 28 July 2017 on Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge in Churchill County, Nevada. The Churchill County Sherriff's Office was contacted, and investigators recovered several bones associated with a burial determined to be of Native American ancestry. The location where the individual was located in proximity to site 26CH1046 which was recorded in 1985 and has other known burials. The individual is believed to be from this site.

The Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex has determined that:

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

• The Paiute-Shoshone Tribe of the Fallon Reservation and Colony, Nevada, have priority for disposition of the human remains described in this notice.

Written claims for disposition of the human remains in this notice must be sent to the authorized representative identified in this notice under ADDRESSES . If no claim for disposition is received by April 20, 2026 the human remains in this notice will become unclaimed human remains. 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 described in this notice may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing claims for disposition are received, the Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex must determine the most appropriate claimant prior to disposition. Requests for joint disposition of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 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 UTK, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in its inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Human remains representing, at least, two individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. These individuals were removed from 14CY23, the Laflin Mound site, located in Clay County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s and donated to the University of Kansas in 1948. These individuals were likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. The site dates to the Middle Woodland, circa 200 BCE-500 CE.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14CY26, the Robert Younkin site, located in Clay County, KS, likely by Floyd Schultz in the 1920s. The circumstances that brought this individual to UTK are currently unknown, but based on past practice this individual likely came to UTK circa or post 1971 due to the actions of William Bass. This mound site dates to the Middle Woodland period.

Human remains representing, at least, eight individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. These individuals were removed from 14CY31, the Hartzell site, located in Clay County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s and donated to the University of Kansas in 1948. These individuals were likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. This mound site dates to the Middle Woodland, circa 200 BCE-500 CE.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14CY32, the Timber Creek site, located in Clay County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s. This individual was likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. This mound site dates to the Middle Woodland, circa 200 BCE-500 CE, with a possible Early Plains component.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14GE3, the Neimuller site, located in Geary County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s. This individual was likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. This mound site dates to the Middle Woodland, circa 200 BCE-500 CE, with a Central Plains component, circa 900-1450 CE.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14GE4, the A. Berry site, located in Geary County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s. This individual was likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. This mound site possibly dates to Middle Woodland through Central Plains periods (circa 200 BCE-1450 CE).

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14GE6, the James Younkin site, located in Geary County, KS, likely by Floyd Schultz in the 1920s. The circumstances that brought this individual to UTK are currently unknown, but based on past practice this individual likely came to UTK circa or post 1971 due to the actions of William Bass. This mound site likely dates to the Middle Woodland (c. 200 BCE-500 CE).

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. This individual was removed from 14GE7, the Dixon site, located in Geary County, KS, by Floyd Schultz during the 1920s. This individual was likely transferred to UTK by William Bass when he began working for UTK in 1971. This mound site likely dates to the Middle Woodland, circa 200 BCE-500 CE.

To our knowledge, the human remains described in this notice were not treated with any potentially hazardous substances.

Cultural affiliation between these human remains and the Indian Tribes listed in this notice was established via archaeological information, geographical information, historical information, Native American Traditional Knowledge/Expert Opinion, and oral history. Clay and Geary counties, KS, are part of the aboriginal lands of the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma and the Kaw Nation, Oklahoma.

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

UTK has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 16 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Kaw Nation, Oklahoma and the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, UTK 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. UTK is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the BIA. Additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of the 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 984 cultural items have been requested for repatriation: 957 ceramic vessel fragments (GRSM 49652-GRSM49663, GRSM 172213-172223, GRSM 172229-172246), one unmodified stone (GRSM 172247), 10 shatter (GRSM 17226), two biface (GRSM 12227), 10 lithic flakes (GRSM 172225, GRSM 172228), two cores (GRSM 1722224, and two faunal bones (GRSM 172248).

Between 1935 and 1936, 984 cultural items were removed from a site in the Qualla Boundary, NC. Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) Forestry Technician, George MacPherson, was authorized to conduct surface and pedestrian surveys of possible archeological sites when time permitted alongside his official trail work. Items were removed without permission or authorization. A review of archeological field notes and reports shows that the cultural items listed in this notice as unassociated funerary objects were placed with individual human remains at the burial. Information obtained during consultation, the items listed in this notice are culturally affiliated with the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the Cherokee Nation, and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma.

The BIA has determined that:

• The 984 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 Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the BIA must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The BIA 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 UC Davis 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, there are a total of 1,159 lots of associated funerary objects (five of which are currently missing). The associated funerary objects are associated with human remains previously removed and reburied at the site. The 1,154 lots of present associated funerary objects are one lot of modified wood, three lots of modified clay, five lots of abraders, eight lots of charcoal, 16 lots of soil samples, 26 lots of groundstone, 47 lots of shell, 63 lots of miscellaneous organic items (seeds and wood), 80 lots of worked bone, 101 lots of projectile points, 138 lots of faunal bone, and 666 lots of chipped stone. The five lots of currently missing associated funerary objects are two lots of worked bone, one lot of quartz crystal, one lot of turtle bone, and one lot of unidentified missing material. Trudy Vaughn of Coyote & Fox Enterprises first excavated site CA-SHA-1048, located south of Redding, California, on April 26, 2005. The site was excavated again by Far Western Anthropological Research Group under Bill Hildebrandt's direction in July and August, 2005 in anticipation of the construction of a residential development. Accession 519 is comprised of materials from both excavations. The University is unaware of any treatment of the associated funerary objects with pesticides, preservatives, or other substances that represent a potential hazard to the objects or to persons handling the objects.

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

UC Davis has determined that:

• The 1,159 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a reasonable connection between the associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Grindstone Indian Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki Indians of California; Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians of California; Redding Rancheria, California; and the Round Valley Indian Tribes, Round Valley Reservation, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, UC Davis must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. UC Davis is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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 Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 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 98 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 98 unassociated funerary objects consist of a stone anchor, bracelets, metal buttons, a carved stone effigy, glass trade beads, hammerstones, mauls, stone net sinkers, projectile points, metal rings, and a metal knob. The items listed were collected over the years by Jim Carty on his family farm in Clark County Washington. The family sold the farm to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1965, and it became part of the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. In 1976, Jim Carty donated the collection to the Refuge. Mr. Carty listed objects as coming from a “burial site.” In 1993, most of the collection was loaned to Portland State University where it is still housed. The remaining portion of the collection is held by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon and Cowlitz Indian Tribe have joined with the Chinook Nation to establish the Lower Columbia River NAGPRA Consortium to work together on this NAGPRA repatriation.

The Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex has determined that:

• The 98 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 Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon and the Cowlitz Indian Tribe.

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the appropriate official 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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex must determine the most appropriate claimant prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural items are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex 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. 3004, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before April 5, 2025. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:

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

A request for removal has been made for the following resource(s):

Additional documentation has been received for the following resource(s):

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Gilcrease 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 eight cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The eight unassociated funerary objects are two lots of stone beads, four lots of shell beads, one lot of glass beads, and one tar mat headrest. These items were removed from near Buena Vista Lake in Kern County, California likely around the mid-20th century. Seven of the items were likely removed by Dr. Norman Westermann, who donated his collection to Gilcrease Museum in 1986. One of the items was collected by Frank Soday, whose collection was purchased in 1982 by the Thomas Gilcrease Museum Association and then donated to the Museum.

The Gilcrease Museum has determined that:

• The eight 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 Tejon Indian Tribe.

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 May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Gilcrease Museum 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 Gilcrease 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 Acting Superintendent, DEWA, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in its inventory or related records.

Human remains representing at least three individuals have been identified. These ancestral remains were removed by a Seton Hall University archeological student during 1974 excavations at a site in Sussex County, NJ. The student was given permission by a university professor to retain the remains for study. In 2020, DEWA staff discovered that the former student had mailed the remains to DEWA. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is reasonably identified by the geographical location or acquisition history of the human remains described in this notice.

DEWA has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Tribe of Indians; and the Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, DEWA 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. DEWA is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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 Cal Poly, and additional information on the determinations in this notice, including the results of consultation, can be found in its inventory or related records. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

Human remains representing, at least, eight individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains are presumed to have been unearthed in downtown San Luis Obispo, CA, as noted in a newspaper clipping from 1958 that was provided with the human remains and given to Cal Poly. There are no records of indication that hazardous substances were used on these human remains.

Based on the information available and the results of consultation, cultural affiliation is reasonably identified by the geographical location or acquisition history of the human remains described in this notice.

Cal Poly has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of the Santa Ynez Reservation, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after May 19, 2025. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Cal Poly 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. Cal Poly is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice.

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

On December 18, 2024, the Commission instituted this investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”), based on a complaint filed by Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd. of Bolton, Ontario, Canada and Husky Injection Molding Systems, Inc. of Milton, Vermont (collectively, “Complainants”). See 89 FR 102953-54 (Dec. 18, 2024). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain components for injection molding machines, and products containing the same by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,713,891; 11,794,375; 10,093,053; 8,834,149 and 7,645,132 (the “Asserted Patents”). Id. at 102953. The Commission's notice of investigation (“NOI”) named AOSIMI of Yuyao, Zhejiang, China as the sole respondent. Id. at 102954. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party.

On January 24, 2025, the Chief Administrative Law Judge issued an order directing AOSIMI to show cause, no later than February 7, 2025, why it should not be found in default for failing to respond to the complaint and NOI. See Order No. 5 (January 24, 2025), at 3. AOSIMI did not respond to the order to show cause.

On February 28, 2025, the Commission issued a notice determining AOSIMI to be in default. See Order No. 7 (February 14, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice, 90 FR 11437-38 (Feb. 28, 2025) (the “Remedy Notice”). In the same notice, the Commission asked parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Id. On March 14, 2025, Complainants filed a written submission, requesting the Commission to issue a limited exclusion order (“LEO”) and a cease and desist order against AOSIMI. The Commission received no other written submissions in response to the Remedy Notice.

When the conditions in section 337(g)(1)(A)-(E) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)(A)-(E)) have been satisfied, section 337(g)(1) and Commission Rule 210.16(c) (19 CFR 210.16(c)) direct the Commission, upon request, to issue a limited exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both against a respondent found in default, based on the allegations regarding a violation of section 337 in the Complaint, which are presumed to be true, unless after consideration of the public interest factors in section 337(g)(1), it finds that such relief should not issue.

Having examined the record of this investigation, including the Complainants' submission in response to the Remedy Notice, the Commission has determined, pursuant to section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)), that the appropriate remedy in this investigation is an LEO prohibiting the unlicensed entry of certain components for injection molding machines, and products containing the same by reason of the infringement of certain claims of the Asserted Patents. The Commission has determined that the public interest factors enumerated in subsection 337(g)(1) do not preclude the issuance of the requested LEO. Although Complainants requested the Commission to issue a cease and desist order (“CDO”) directed to AOSIMI, the Commission has determined not to issue the requested CDO because of the lack of evidence or allegations that AOSIMI maintains commercially significant inventories and/or engages in significant commercial operations in the United States.

Chair Karpel agrees that section 337(g)(1) is the appropriate authority for issuance of relief in this investigation but disagrees with the determination not to issue the CDO requested by Complainants. Specifically, Chair Karpel supports issuance of both the requested LEO and the requested CDO against AOSIMI because the criteria for issuance of such relief under section 337(g)(1)(A)-(E) are met as to AOSIMI. (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)(A)-(E); see Order No. 7 (February 14, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice, 90 FR 11437-38 (Feb. 28, 2025). Here, in addition to an exclusion order, Complainants have requested a CDO as to AOSIMI in their remedy submission before the Commission. Given that sections 337(g)(1)(A)-(E) are satisfied, in Chair Karpel's view, the statute directs the Commission to issue the requested CDO, subject to consideration of the public interest. Chair Karpel further finds that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(g)(1) do not preclude the issuance of the CDO directed to AOSIMI. Accordingly, Chair Karpel supports issuance of the CDO, in addition to the issuance of the LEO discussed above, under section 337(g)(1).

The Commission has further determined that the bond during the period of Presidential review pursuant to section 337(j) (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) shall be in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the entered value of the imported articles that are subject to the LEO.

The investigation is terminated.

The Commission's vote for this determination took place on April 15, 2025.

The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on January 13, 2025, Scottsdale Research Institute, 12815 North Cave Creek Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85022, applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to import Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients for clinical research by Schedule I registrants. The company aim to meet the needs of Schedule I researchers with these novel compounds. In reference to drug codes7360 (Marihuana), the company plans to import a synthetic cannabidiol. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration.

Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2).

Authorization will not extend to the import of Food and Drug Administration approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on February 5, 2025, Patheon API Services Inc., 101 Technology Place, Florence, South Carolina 29501, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances to support the clinical trials of their customers. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on January 9, 2025, Myonex LLC, 100 Progress Drive, Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044, applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to import the listed controlled substances in dosage form for clinical trials, research, and analytical purposes. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of Food and Drug Administration approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on January 31, 2025, Stepan Company, 100 West Hunter Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey 07607- 1021, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances for use as internal intermediates or for sale to its customers. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on March 14, 2025, Research Triangle Institute, 3040 East Cornwallis Road, Hermann Building Room 106, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2194, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substance(s) synthetically for distribution to its customers for research and as analytical reference standards. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on February 19, 2025, Restek Corporation, 110 Benner Circle, Bellefonte, Pennsylvania 16823-8433, applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):

The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled substances for the Drug Enforcement Administration-exempted certified reference materials. In-house synthesis gives access to compounds that are difficult to source. In reference to drug codes 7360 (Marihuana), and 7370 (Tetrahydrocannabinols), the company plans to bulk manufacture these drugs as synthetic. No other activities for these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

The inventory includes service contract actions over $25,000 that were awarded in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. Additionally, the inventory supplement includes information collected from contractors on the amount invoiced and direct labor hours expended for covered service contracts. The Department of Justice analyzes this data for the purpose of determining whether its contract labor is being used in an effective and appropriate manner and if the mix of federal employees and contractors in the agency is effectively balanced. The inventory and supplement do not include contractor proprietary or sensitive information.

Authority: Section 743 of Division C of the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Pub. L. 111-117.

The National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in construction raises fall hazard awareness across the country in an effort to stop fall fatalities and injuries. Participants (mainly employers) download a Certificate of Participation by completing a simple eight question online survey. The survey is the primary means that OSHA will have for validating participation in the Stand-Down. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on November 5, 2024 (89 FR 87897).

Comments are invited on: (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6.

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

Agency: DOL-OSHA.

Title of Collection: National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction.

OMB Control Number: 1218-0271.

Affected Public: Private Sector— Businesses or other for-profits.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,500.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 4,500.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 750 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

This ICR supports the Temporary Final Rule (TFR), Exercise of Time-Limited Authority to Increase the Numerical Limitation for Fiscal Year 2025 for H-2B Temporary Nonagricultural Worker Program and Portability Flexibility for H-2B Workers Seeking To Change Employers, which is being promulgated by DOL (or the Department) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (collectively, the Departments). The regulatory requirements will be codified at 8 CFR part 214 and 20 CFR part 655. The ICR includes a new form, Attestation for Employers Seeking to Employ H-2B Nonimmigrant Workers under Section 105 of Division G, Title I of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, Public Law 118-47 (FY 2024 Omnibus), as extended by section 101(6) and 106 of Division A, Title I of the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025 Public Law 118-83, Form ETA-9142-B-CAA-9 (Form ETA-9142-B-CAA-9). For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on December 2, 2024 (89 FR 95626).

Comments are invited on: (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6.

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

Agency: DOL-ETA.

Title of Collection: Attestation for Employers Seeking to Employ H-2B Nonimmigrant Workers under section 105 of Division G, Title 1 of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, Public Law 118-47, as Extended.

OMB Control Number: 1205-0563.

Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 26,065.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 26,065.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 32,581 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.