91
4
Wednesday, January 7, 2026
Contents
Agriculture

Agriculture Department

See
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See
Food and Nutrition Service

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals,
494
2026-00044
Animal

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:
Animal Disease Traceability,
495-496
2026-00097
Restricted, Prohibited, and Controlled Importation of Animal and Poultry Products and Byproducts into the United States,
494-495
2026-00095
Consumer Financial Protection

Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection

RULES
Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold,
445-447
2026-00087
Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold,
447-452
2026-00085

NOTICES
Consumer Credit Card Market Report, 2025,
504-505
2026-00081
Coast Guard

Coast Guard

RULES
2024 Quarterly Listings:
First Quarter; Safety Zones, Security Zones, and Special Local Regulations,
452-453
2026-00077

PROPOSED RULES
Safety Zone:
West of Cyril E. King Airport, St. Thomas, VI,
490-492
2026-00048
Commerce

Commerce Department

See
International Trade Administration

See
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Defense Department

Defense Department

NOTICES
Arms Sales; Correction,
505-506
2026-00029
Energy Department

Energy Department

See
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Environmental Protection

Environmental Protection Agency

PROPOSED RULES
Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System:
Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Extension of an Alternative Closure Requirement Deadline,
492-493
2026-00084
Federal Aviation

Federal Aviation Administration

PROPOSED RULES
Airworthiness Directives:
De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes,
454-457
2026-00117
Gulfstream Aerospace LP Airplanes,
457-459
2026-00119
Requirements for Interference-Tolerant Radio Altimeter Systems,
459-490
2026-00051
Federal Contract

Federal Contract Compliance Programs Office

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:
Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, As Amended,
541-542
2026-00047
Federal Deposit

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

NOTICES
Community Reinvestment Act Regulations Asset-Size Thresholds,
509-510
2026-00042
Federal Energy

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES
Combined Filings,
506-508
2026-00078
2026-00080
Federal Reserve

Federal Reserve System

NOTICES
Change in Bank Control:
Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company,
508-509
2026-00052
Community Reinvestment Act Regulations Asset-Size Thresholds,
509-510
2026-00042
Food and Nutrition

Food and Nutrition Service

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: A Review of Major Changes in Program Design and Management Evaluation Systems,
496-499
2026-00091
Foreign Assets

Foreign Assets Control Office

NOTICES
Sanctions Actions,
551
2026-00075
Health and Human

Health and Human Services Department

See
Health Resources and Services Administration

See
National Institutes of Health
Health Resources

Health Resources and Services Administration

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:
COVID-19 Provider Relief Fund and American Rescue Plan Rural Payment Reporting Activities,
512-513
2026-00088
Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program Parts A and B Unobligated Balances and Rebate Addendum Tables,
510-512
2026-00083
Homeland

Homeland Security Department

See
Coast Guard

See
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Housing

Housing and Urban Development Department

NOTICES
Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Membership Announcement,
515-516
2026-00089
Interior

Interior Department

See
Land Management Bureau

See
National Park Service
International Trade Adm

International Trade Administration

NOTICES
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews:
Hexamethylenetetramine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia,
501-504
2026-00092
Hexamethylenetetramine from India,
499-501
2026-00093
International Trade Com

International Trade Commission

NOTICES
Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.:
Certain Bicycle Trainers and Components Thereof,
540-541
2026-00038
Certain Screen Protectors, Screen Protector Systems, and Components Thereof,
539-540
2026-00033
Certain Skid-steer Loaders, Compact Track Loaders, Excavators, Wheel Loaders, Dozers, and Components Thereof,
538
2026-00032
Thermoformed Molded Fiber Products from China and Vietnam,
537-538
2026-00076
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and Vietnam,
538-539
2026-00082
Labor Department

Labor Department

See
Federal Contract Compliance Programs Office
Land

Land Management Bureau

NOTICES
Application:
Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Delta River, Tangle River, and Tangle Lakes, in Alaska,
516-517
2026-00031
Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the East Fork of the Arolik River, the Arolik River, and Arolik Lake in Alaska,
517-518
2026-00034
Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Goodnews River System, Alaska,
518-519
2026-00035
Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Kwethluk River in Alaska,
520-521
2026-00041
Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the West Fork of the Dennison Fork and the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River in Alaska,
519-520
2026-00030
Maritime

Maritime Administration

NOTICES
Use of Foreign-Built Small Passenger Vessel in United States Coastwise Trade:
M/V FORTUNA,
550-551
2026-00098
S/V SEAS THE MOMENT,
549-550
2026-00096
National Institute

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES
Hearings, Meetings, Proceedings, etc.:
National Human Genome Research Institute,
513-514
2026-00053
2026-00074
National Oceanic

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOTICES
Hearings, Meetings, Proceedings, etc.:
Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee,
504
2026-00050
National Park

National Park Service

NOTICES
Inventory Completion:
Alabama Department of Transportation, Montgomery, AL,
534
2026-00054
California State Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA,
528-529
2026-00067
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH,
525-526
2026-00065
Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH,
533-534
2026-00066
Mercyhurst University, Erie, PA,
535-536
2026-00061
Museum of the Cherokee People, Cherokee, NC,
527-528
2026-00057
Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA,
529-530
2026-00060
S'edav Va'aki Museum, City of Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ; Amendment,
529
2026-00056
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, San Francisco, CA,
522-523
2026-00058
U.S. Department of Defense, Division of Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base, Port Saint Joe, FL,
521-522
2026-00055
Repatriation of Cultural Items:
Field Museum, Chicago, IL,
525
2026-00070
Fowler Museum, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA,
523-525
2026-00073
Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence, RI,
536-537
2026-00068
Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History, Pacific Grove, CA,
526-527
2026-00069
Shelburne Museum, Shelburne, VT,
522
2026-00064
Sinclair Community College, Dayton, OH,
531
2026-00062
U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC, and Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ,
534-535
2026-00072
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, San Francisco, CA,
531-532
2026-00059
University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, FL,
532-533
2026-00071
Wilson Museum, Castine, ME,
530-531
2026-00063
Nuclear Regulatory

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NOTICES
Permits; Applications, Issuances, etc.:
Duke Energy Corp.; Belews Creek,
542
2026-00090
Securities

Securities and Exchange Commission

NOTICES
Application:
Source Capital/DE/, et al.,
542-543
2026-00036
Deregistration under the Investment Company Act of 1940,
548-549
2026-00037
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes:
Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.,
546-548
2026-00040
Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.,
543-546
2026-00039
Transportation Department

Transportation Department

See
Federal Aviation Administration

See
Maritime Administration
Treasury

Treasury Department

See
Foreign Assets Control Office
U.S. Citizenship

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

NOTICES
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals:
Application for Free Training for Civics and Citizenship Teachers of Adults; Civics and Citizenship Toolkit,
514-515
2026-00045
Veteran Affairs

Veterans Affairs Department

NOTICES
Hearings, Meetings, Proceedings, etc.:
Cooperative Studies Scientific Evaluation Committee,
552
2026-00086
Joint Biomedical Laboratory and Clinical Science Research and Development Services Scientific Merit Review Board,
552
2026-00094

Reader Aids
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
91
4
Wednesday, January 7, 2026
Rules and Regulations
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
12 CFR Part 1003
Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold

AGENCY:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

ACTION:
Final rule; official interpretation.

SUMMARY:
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) is amending official commentary interpreting requirements of the Bureau's Regulation C to reflect the asset-size exemption threshold for banks, savings associations, and credit unions based on the annual percentage change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). Based on the 2.5 average percent increase in the CPI-W for the 12-month period ending November 2025, the exemption threshold is adjusted to $59 million from $58 million. Institutions with assets of $59 million or less as of December 31, 2025, are exempt from collecting data in 2026.

DATES:
This rule is effective on January 7, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Gettler, Paralegal Specialist, Office of Regulations, at (202) 435-7700 or at: https://reginquiries.consumerfinance.gov. If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact CFPB_Accessibility@cfpb.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Bureau is amending Regulation C, which implements the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA) asset thresholds, to establish the asset-sized exemption threshold for depository financial institutions for 2026. The asset threshold will be $59 million for 2026.

I. Background
HMDA requires most mortgage lenders located in metropolitan areas to collect data about their housing-related lending activity. ^1 Annually, lenders must report their data to the appropriate Federal agencies and make the data available to the public. The Bureau's Regulation C implements HMDA. ^2
^1 12 U.S.C. 2801-2810.
^2 12 CFR part 1003.
Prior to 1997, HMDA exempted certain depository institutions as defined in HMDA ( i.e., banks, savings associations, and credit unions) with assets totaling $10 million or less as of the preceding year-end. In 1996, HMDA was amended to expand the asset-size exemption for these depository institutions. ^3 The amendment increased the dollar amount of the asset-size exemption threshold by requiring a one-time adjustment of the $10 million figure based on the percentage by which the CPI-W for 1996 exceeded the CPI-W for 1975, and it provided for annual adjustments thereafter based on the annual percentage increase in the CPI-W, rounded to the nearest multiple of $1 million.
^3 12 U.S.C. 2808(b).
The definition of “financial institution” in § 1003.2(g) provides that the Bureau will adjust the asset threshold based on the year-to-year change in the average of the CPI-W, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, rounded to the nearest $1 million. For 2025, the threshold was $58 million. During the 12-month period ending in November 2025, the average of the CPI-W increased by 2.5 percent. ^4 As a result, the exemption threshold is increased to $59 million for 2026. Thus, banks, savings associations, and credit unions with assets of $59 million or less as of December 31, 2025, are exempt from collecting data in 2026. An institution's exemption from collecting data in 2026 does not affect its responsibility to report data it was required to collect in 2025.
^4 The non-seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) for October 2025 was not reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Accordingly, the Bureau excluded October 2025 from its calculation of the average CPI-W for the 12-month period ending in November 2025.

II. Procedural Requirements

A. Administrative Procedure Act
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), notice and opportunity for public comment are not required if the Bureau finds that notice and opportunity for public comment are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. ^5 Pursuant to this final rule, comment 2(g)-2 in Regulation C, supplement I, is amended to update the exemption threshold. The amendment in this final rule is technical and non-discretionary, and it merely applies the formula established by Regulation C for determining any adjustments to the exemption threshold. For these reasons, the Bureau has determined that publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and providing opportunity for public comment are unnecessary. Therefore, the amendment is adopted in final form.
^5 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Section 553(d) of the APA generally requires publication of a final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date, except in the case of (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule. ^6 At a minimum, the Bureau has determined that the amendment falls under the third exception to section 553(d). The Bureau finds that there is good cause to make the amendment effective as of the date of publication in the Federal Register . The amendment in this final rule is technical and non-discretionary, and it applies the method previously established in the agency's regulations for determining adjustments to the threshold.
^6 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required. ^7 As noted previously, the Bureau has determined that it is unnecessary to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirement relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis does not apply.
^7 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), Federal agencies are generally required to seek the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s approval for information collection requirements prior to implementation. Under the PRA, the Bureau may not conduct or sponsor and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person is not required to respond to an information collection unless the information collection displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
The Bureau has determined that this final rule would not impose any new or revised information collection requirements (recordkeeping, reporting or disclosure requirements) that would constitute collections of information requiring OMB approval under the PRA.

D. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under E.O. 12866, as amended.

D. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, the Bureau will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to the rule taking effect. ^8 The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has designated this rule as not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
^8 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1003
Banks, Banking, Credit unions, Mortgages, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.

Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau amends Regulation C, 12 CFR part 1003, as set forth below:

PART 1003—HOME MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE (REGULATION C)
1. The authority citation for part 1003 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
12 U.S.C. 2803, 2804, 2805, 5512, 5581.
2. Supplement I to part 1003 is amended by revising 2(g) Financial Institution under the heading Section 1003.2—Definitions to read as follows:

Supplement I to Part 1003—Official Interpretations
* * * * *

Section 1003.2—Definitions
* * * * *

2(g) Financial Institution
1. Preceding calendar year and preceding December 31. The definition of financial institution refers both to the preceding calendar year and the preceding December 31. These terms refer to the calendar year and the December 31 preceding the current calendar year. For example, in 2019, the preceding calendar year is 2018 and the preceding December 31 is December 31, 2018. Accordingly, in 2019, Financial Institution A satisfies the asset-size threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i) if its assets exceeded the threshold specified in comment 2(g)-2 on December 31, 2018. Likewise, in 2020, Financial Institution A does not meet the loan-volume test described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(v)(A) if it originated fewer than 25 closed-end mortgage loans during either 2018 or 2019.
2. Adjustment of exemption threshold for banks, savings associations, and credit unions. For data collection in 2026, the asset-size exemption threshold is $59 million. Banks, savings associations, and credit unions with assets at or below $59 million as of December 31, 2025, are exempt from collecting data for 2026.
3. Merger or acquisition—coverage of surviving or newly formed institution. After a merger or acquisition, the surviving or newly formed institution is a financial institution under § 1003.2(g) if it, considering the combined assets, location, and lending activity of the surviving or newly formed institution and the merged or acquired institutions or acquired branches, satisfies the criteria included in § 1003.2(g). For example, A and B merge. The surviving or newly formed institution meets the loan threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(v)(B) if the surviving or newly formed institution, A, and B originated a combined total of at least 200 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Likewise, the surviving or newly formed institution meets the asset-size threshold in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i) if its assets and the combined assets of A and B on December 31 of the preceding calendar year exceeded the threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i). Comment 2(g)-4 discusses a financial institution's responsibilities during the calendar year of a merger.
4. Merger or acquisition—coverage for calendar year of merger or acquisition. The scenarios described below illustrate a financial institution's responsibilities for the calendar year of a merger or acquisition. For purposes of these illustrations, a “covered institution” means a financial institution, as defined in § 1003.2(g), that is not exempt from reporting under § 1003.3(a), and “an institution that is not covered” means either an institution that is not a financial institution, as defined in § 1003.2(g), or an institution that is exempt from reporting under § 1003.3(a).
i. Two institutions that are not covered merge. The surviving or newly formed institution meets all of the requirements necessary to be a covered institution. No data collection is required for the calendar year of the merger (even though the merger creates an institution that meets all of the requirements necessary to be a covered institution). When a branch office of an institution that is not covered is acquired by another institution that is not covered, and the acquisition results in a covered institution, no data collection is required for the calendar year of the acquisition.
ii. A covered institution and an institution that is not covered merge. The covered institution is the surviving institution, or a new covered institution is formed. For the calendar year of the merger, data collection is required for covered loans and applications handled in the offices of the merged institution that was previously covered and is optional for covered loans and applications handled in offices of the merged institution that was previously not covered. When a covered institution acquires a branch office of an institution that is not covered, data collection is optional for covered loans and applications handled by the acquired branch office for the calendar year of the acquisition.
iii. A covered institution and an institution that is not covered merge. The institution that is not covered is the surviving institution, or a new institution that is not covered is formed. For the calendar year of the merger, data collection is required for covered loans and applications handled in offices of the previously covered institution that took place prior to the merger. After the merger date, data collection is optional for covered loans and applications handled in the offices of the institution that was previously covered. When an institution remains not covered after acquiring a branch office of a covered institution, data collection is required for transactions of the acquired branch office that take place prior to the acquisition. Data collection by the acquired branch office is optional for transactions taking place in the remainder of the calendar year after the acquisition.
iv. Two covered institutions merge. The surviving or newly formed institution is a covered institution. Data collection is required for the entire calendar year of the merger. The surviving or newly formed institution files either a consolidated submission or separate submissions for that calendar year. When a covered institution acquires a branch office of a covered institution, data collection is required for the entire calendar year of the merger. Data for the acquired branch office may be submitted by either institution.
5. Originations. Whether an institution is a financial institution depends in part on whether the institution originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years or at least 200 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Comments 4(a)-2 through -4 discuss whether activities with respect to a particular closed-end mortgage loan or open-end line of credit constitute an origination for purposes of § 1003.2(g).
6. Branches of foreign banks—treated as banks. A Federal branch or a State-licensed or insured branch of a foreign bank that meets the definition of a “bank” under section 3(a)(1) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(a)) is a bank for the purposes of § 1003.2(g).
7. Branches and offices of foreign banks and other entities—treated as nondepository financial institutions. A Federal agency, State-licensed agency, State-licensed uninsured branch of a foreign bank, commercial lending company owned or controlled by a foreign bank, or entity operating under section 25 or 25A of the Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. 601 and 611 (Edge Act and agreement corporations) may not meet the definition of “bank” under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and may thereby fail to satisfy the definition of a depository financial institution under § 1003.2(g)(1). An entity is nonetheless a financial institution if it meets the definition of nondepository financial institution under § 1003.2(g)(2).
* * * * *
Russell Vought,

Acting Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
12 CFR Part 1026
Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold

AGENCY:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

ACTION:
Final rule; official interpretation.

SUMMARY:
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) is amending the official commentary to its Regulation Z in order to make annual adjustments to the asset-size thresholds exempting certain creditors from the requirement to establish an escrow account for a higher-priced mortgage loan (HPML). The exemption threshold for creditors and their affiliates that regularly extended covered transactions secured by first liens is adjusted to $2.785 billion and the exemption threshold for certain insured depository institutions and insured credit unions with assets of $10 billion or less is adjusted to $12.485 billion.

DATES:
This rule is effective on January 7, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Gettler, Paralegal Specialist, Office of Regulations, at (202) 435-7700 or at: https://reginquiries.consumerfinance.gov. If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact CFPB_Accessibility@cfpb.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
Section 129D of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) generally requires creditors to establish escrow accounts for certain first-lien higher-priced mortgage loan transactions. However, TILA section 129D also permits the Bureau to exempt creditors from this higher-priced mortgage loan escrow requirement if they meet certain requirements, including any asset-size threshold that the Bureau may establish.
In the 2013 Escrows Final Rule, ^1 the Bureau established an asset-size threshold of $2 billion, to adjust automatically each year, based on the year-to-year change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars. ^2 In 2015, the Bureau made two general revisions to the threshold. It revised the threshold to count the assets of the creditor's affiliates that regularly extended covered transactions secured by first liens during the applicable period. It also added a grace period to allow an otherwise eligible creditor that exceeded the asset limit in the preceding calendar year (but not in the calendar year before the preceding year) to continue to operate as a small creditor with respect to transactions with applications received before April 1 of the current calendar year. ^3 For 2025, the threshold was $2.717 billion.
^1 78 FR 4726 (Jan. 22, 2013).
^2 See 12 CFR 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C).
^3 See 80 FR 59943, 59951 (Oct. 2, 2015). The Bureau also issued an interim final rule in March 2016 to revise certain provisions in Regulation Z to effectuate the Helping Expand Lending Practices in Rural Communities Act's amendments to TILA (Pub. L. 114-94, sec. 89003, 129 Stat. 1312, 1800-01 (2015)). The rule broadened the cohort of creditors that may be eligible under TILA for the special provisions allowing origination of balloon-payment qualified mortgages and balloon-payment high-cost mortgages, as well as for the escrow exemption. See 81 FR 16074 (Mar. 25, 2016).
During the 12-month period ending in November 2025, the average of the CPI-W increased by 2.5 percent. ^4 As a result, the exemption threshold is increased to $2.785 billion for 2026. ^5 Thus, if the creditor's assets together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2025 are less than $2.785 billion on December 31, 2025, and it meets the other requirements of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii), the creditor will be exempt from the escrow-accounts requirement for higher-priced mortgage loans in 2026 and will also be exempt from the escrow-accounts requirement for higher-priced mortgage loans for purposes of any loan consummated in 2027 with applications received before April 1, 2027. The adjustment to the escrows asset-size exemption threshold also will increase the threshold for small-creditor portfolio and balloon-payment qualified mortgages under Regulation Z. The requirements for small-creditor portfolio qualified mortgages at § 1026.43(e)(5)(i)(D) reference the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C). Likewise, the requirements for balloon-payment qualified mortgages at § 1026.43(f)(1)(vi) reference the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C). Under § 1026.32(d)(1)(ii)(C), balloon-payment qualified mortgages that satisfy all applicable criteria in § 1026.43(f)(1)(i) through (vi) and (f)(2), including being made by creditors that have (together with certain affiliates) total assets below the threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C), are also excepted from the prohibition on balloon payments for high-cost mortgages.
^4 The non-seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) for October 2025 was not reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Accordingly, the Bureau excluded October 2025 from its calculation of the average CPI-W for the 12-month period ending in November 2025.
^5 Adjusted dollar amounts throughout this final rule are calculated by applying the relevant consumer price index to the previous year's unrounded dollar amount before rounding to the nearest million dollars. Accordingly, applying the rounded consumer price index figures to the previous year's rounded dollar amounts may not add up to the total dollar amount shown.
In the 2018 Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA), ^6 Congress directed the Bureau to, by regulation, establish a new exemption from TILA's escrow requirement for transactions by certain insured depository institutions and insured credit unions. ^7 In 2021, the Bureau issued a final rule implementing this exemption in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi) (2021 Escrows Rule). ^8 The final rule exempted from the Regulation Z HPML escrow requirement any loan made by an insured depository institution or insured credit union and secured by a first lien on the principal dwelling of a consumer if: (1) the institution has assets of $10 billion or less; (2) the institution and its affiliates originated 1,000 or fewer loans secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling during the preceding calendar year; and (3) certain of the existing HPML escrow exemption criteria are met. In the 2021 Escrows Rule, the Bureau established an asset-size threshold of $10 billion or less in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi)(A), to adjust automatically each year, based on the year-to-year change in the average of the CPI-W, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars. Unlike the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) and the other thresholds in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi), affiliates are not considered in calculating compliance with this asset threshold. For calendar year 2025, the asset threshold was $12.179 billion.
^6 Public Law 115-174, 132 Stat. 1296 (2018).
^7 EGRRCPA sec. 108, 132 Stat. 1304-05; 15 U.S.C. 1639d(c)(2).
^8 86 FR 9840 (Feb. 17, 2021).
During the 12-month period ending in November 2025, the average of the CPI-W increased by 2.5 percent. As a result, the exemption threshold is increased to $12.485 billion for 2026. Thus, a creditor that is an insured depository institution or insured credit union that during calendar year 2025 had assets of $12.485 billion or less on December 31, 2025, satisfies this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2026 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2027 for which the application was received before April 1, 2027.

II. Procedural Requirements

A. Administrative Procedure Act
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), notice and opportunity for public comment are not required if the Bureau finds that notice and public comment are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Pursuant to this final rule, comment 35(b)(2)(iii)-1 in Regulation Z is amended to update the exemption threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) and comment 35(b)(2)(vi)(A)-1 in Regulation Z is amended to update the exemption threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi). The amendments in this final rule are technical and merely apply the formulae previously established in Regulation Z for determining any adjustments to the exemption thresholds. For these reasons, the Bureau has determined that publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and providing opportunity for public comment are unnecessary. Therefore, the amendments are adopted in final form.
Section 553(d) of the APA generally requires publication of a final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date, except in the case of (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). At a minimum, the Bureau has determined the amendments fall under the third exception to section 553(d). The Bureau finds that there is good cause to make the amendments effective as of the date of publication in the Federal Register . The amendments in this final rule are technical and non-discretionary, and they merely apply the method previously established in the agency's regulations for automatic adjustments to the thresholds.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required. ^9 As noted previously, the Bureau has determined that it is unnecessary to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirement relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis does not apply.
^9 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), Federal agencies are generally required to seek the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s approval for information collection requirements prior to implementation. Under the PRA, the Bureau may not conduct or sponsor and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person is not required to respond to an information collection unless the information collection displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
The Bureau has determined that this final rule would not impose any new or revised information collection requirements (recordkeeping, reporting or disclosure requirements) that would constitute collections of information requiring OMB approval under the PRA.

D. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under E.O. 12866, as amended.

E. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), the Bureau will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to the rule taking effect. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has designated this rule as not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1026
Advertising, Banks, Banking, Consumer protection, Credit, Credit unions, Mortgages, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations, Truth-in-lending.

Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau amends Regulation Z, 12 CFR part 1026, as set forth below:

PART 1026—TRUTH IN LENDING (REGULATION Z)
1. The authority citation for part 1026 is revised to read as follows:

Authority:
12 U.S.C. 2601, 2603-2605, 2607, 2609, 2617, 3353, 3354, 5511, 5512, 5532, 5581; 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.
2. In supplement I to part 1026, under § 1026.35—Requirements for Higher-Priced Mortgage Loans, 35(b)(2) Exemptions, revise Paragraph 35(b)(2)(iii) and Paragraph 35(b)(2)(vi)(A) to read as follows:

Supplement I to Part 1026—Official Interpretations
* * * * *

Subpart E—Special Rules for Certain Home Mortgage Transactions
* * * * *

Section 1026.35—Requirements for Higher-Priced Mortgage Loans
* * * * *

35(b)(2) Exemptions
* * * * *

Paragraph 35(b)(2)(iii)
1. Requirements for exemption. Under § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii), except as provided in § 1026.35(b)(2)(v), a creditor need not establish an escrow account for taxes and insurance for a higher-priced mortgage loan, provided the following four conditions are satisfied when the higher-priced mortgage loan is consummated:
i. During the preceding calendar year, or during either of the two preceding calendar years if the application for the loan was received before April 1 of the current calendar year, a creditor extended a first-lien covered transaction, as defined in § 1026.43(b)(1), secured by a property located in an area that is either “rural” or “underserved,” as set forth in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iv).
A. In general, whether the rural-or-underserved test is satisfied depends on the creditor's activity during the preceding calendar year. However, if the application for the loan in question was received before April 1 of the current calendar year, the creditor may instead meet the rural-or-underserved test based on its activity during the next-to-last calendar year. This provides creditors with a grace period if their activity meets the rural-or-underserved test (in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(A)) in one calendar year but fails to meet it in the next calendar year.
B. A creditor meets the rural-or-underserved test for any higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during a calendar year if it extended a first-lien covered transaction in the preceding calendar year secured by a property located in a rural-or-underserved area. If the creditor does not meet the rural-or-underserved test in the preceding calendar year, the creditor meets this condition for a higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during the current calendar year only if the application for the loan was received before April 1 of the current calendar year and the creditor extended a first-lien covered transaction during the next-to-last calendar year that is secured by a property located in a rural or underserved area. The following examples are illustrative:
1. Assume that a creditor extended during 2016 a first-lien covered transaction that is secured by a property located in a rural or underserved area. Because the creditor extended a first-lien covered transaction during 2016 that is secured by a property located in a rural or underserved area, the creditor can meet this condition for exemption for any higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during 2017.
2. Assume that a creditor did not extend during 2016 a first-lien covered transaction secured by a property that is located in a rural or underserved area. Assume further that the same creditor extended during 2015 a first-lien covered transaction that is located in a rural or underserved area. Assume further that the creditor consummates a higher-priced mortgage loan in 2017 for which the application was received in November 2017. Because the creditor did not extend during 2016 a first-lien covered transaction secured by a property that is located in a rural or underserved area, and the application was received on or after April 1, 2017, the creditor does not meet this condition for exemption. However, assume instead that the creditor consummates a higher-priced mortgage loan in 2017 based on an application received in February 2017. The creditor meets this condition for exemption for this loan because the application was received before April 1, 2017, and the creditor extended during 2015 a first-lien covered transaction that is located in a rural or underserved area.
ii. The creditor and its affiliates together extended no more than 2,000 covered transactions, as defined in § 1026.43(b)(1), secured by first liens, that were sold, assigned, or otherwise transferred by the creditor or its affiliates to another person, or that were subject at the time of consummation to a commitment to be acquired by another person, during the preceding calendar year or during either of the two preceding calendar years if the application for the loan was received before April 1 of the current calendar year. For purposes of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(B), a transfer of a first-lien covered transaction to “another person” includes a transfer by a creditor to its affiliate.
A. In general, whether this condition is satisfied depends on the creditor's activity during the preceding calendar year. However, if the application for the loan in question is received before April 1 of the current calendar year, the creditor may instead meet this condition based on activity during the next-to-last calendar year. This provides creditors with a grace period if their activity falls at or below the threshold in one calendar year but exceeds it in the next calendar year.
B. For example, assume that in 2015 a creditor and its affiliates together extended 1,500 loans that were sold, assigned, or otherwise transferred by the creditor or its affiliates to another person, or that were subject at the time of consummation to a commitment to be acquired by another person, and 2,500 such loans in 2016. Because the 2016 transaction activity exceeds the threshold but the 2015 transaction activity does not, the creditor satisfies this condition for exemption for a higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during 2017 if the creditor received the application for the loan before April 1, 2017, but does not satisfy this condition for a higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during 2017 if the application for the loan was received on or after April 1, 2017.
C. For purposes of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(B), extensions of first-lien covered transactions, during the applicable time period, by all of a creditor's affiliates, as “affiliate” is defined in § 1026.32(b)(5), are counted toward the threshold in this section. “Affiliate” is defined in § 1026.32(b)(5) as “any company that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with another company, as set forth in the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq. ).” Under the Bank Holding Company Act, a company has control over a bank or another company if it directly or indirectly or acting through one or more persons owns, controls, or has power to vote 25 per centum or more of any class of voting securities of the bank or company; it controls in any manner the election of a majority of the directors or trustees of the bank or company; or the Federal Reserve Board determines, after notice and opportunity for hearing, that the company directly or indirectly exercises a controlling influence over the management or policies of the bank or company. 12 U.S.C. 1841(a)(2).
iii. As of the end of the preceding calendar year, or as of the end of either of the two preceding calendar years if the application for the loan was received before April 1 of the current calendar year, the creditor and its affiliates that regularly extended covered transactions secured by first liens, together, had total assets that are less than the applicable annual asset threshold.
A. For purposes of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C), in addition to the creditor's assets, only the assets of a creditor's “affiliate” (as defined by § 1026.32(b)(5)) that regularly extended covered transactions (as defined by § 1026.43(b)(1)) secured by first liens, are counted toward the applicable annual asset threshold. See comment 35(b)(2)(iii)-1.ii.C for discussion of definition of “affiliate.”
B. Only the assets of a creditor's affiliate that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during the applicable period are included in calculating the creditor's assets. The meaning of “regularly extended” is based on the number of times a person extends consumer credit for purposes of the definition of “creditor” in § 1026.2(a)(17). Because covered transactions are “transactions secured by a dwelling,” consistent with § 1026.2(a)(17)(v), an affiliate regularly extended covered transactions if it extended more than five covered transactions in a calendar year. Also consistent with § 1026.2(a)(17)(v), because a covered transaction may be a high-cost mortgage subject to § 1026.32, an affiliate regularly extends covered transactions if, in any 12-month period, it extends more than one covered transaction that is subject to the requirements of § 1026.32 or one or more such transactions through a mortgage broker. Thus, if a creditor's affiliate regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during the preceding calendar year, the creditor's assets as of the end of the preceding calendar year, for purposes of the asset limit, take into account the assets of that affiliate. If the creditor, together with its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions, exceeded the asset limit in the preceding calendar year—to be eligible to operate as a small creditor for transactions with applications received before April 1 of the current calendar year—the assets of the creditor's affiliates that regularly extended covered transactions in the year before the preceding calendar year are included in calculating the creditor's assets.
C. If multiple creditors share ownership of a company that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions, the assets of the company count toward the asset limit for a co-owner creditor if the company is an “affiliate,” as defined in § 1026.32(b)(5), of the co-owner creditor. Assuming the company is not an affiliate of the co-owner creditor by virtue of any other aspect of the definition (such as by the company and co-owner creditor being under common control), the company's assets are included toward the asset limit of the co-owner creditor only if the company is controlled by the co-owner creditor, “as set forth in the Bank Holding Company Act.” If the co-owner creditor and the company are affiliates (by virtue of any aspect of the definition), the co-owner creditor counts all of the company's assets toward the asset limit, regardless of the co-owner creditor's ownership share. Further, because the co-owner and the company are mutual affiliates the company also would count all of the co-owner's assets towards its own asset limit. See comment 35(b)(2)(iii)-1.ii.C for discussion of the definition of “affiliate.”
D. A creditor satisfies the criterion in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C) for purposes of any higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during 2016, for example, if the creditor (together with its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions) had total assets of less than the applicable asset threshold on December 31, 2015. A creditor that (together with its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions) did not meet the applicable asset threshold on December 31, 2015, satisfies this criterion for a higher-priced mortgage loan consummated during 2016 if the application for the loan was received before April 1, 2016, and the creditor (together with its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions) had total assets of less than the applicable asset threshold on December 31, 2014.
E. Under § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C), the $2,000,000,000 asset threshold adjusts automatically each year based on the year-to-year change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars. The Bureau will publish notice of the asset threshold each year by amending this comment. For calendar year 2026, the asset threshold is $2,785,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2025 has total assets of less than $2,785,000,000 on December 31, 2025, satisfies this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2026 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2027 for which the application was received before April 1, 2027. For historical purposes:
1. For calendar year 2013, the asset threshold was $2,000,000,000. Creditors that had total assets of less than $2,000,000,000 on December 31, 2012, satisfied this criterion for purposes of the exemption during 2013.
2. For calendar year 2014, the asset threshold was $2,028,000,000. Creditors that had total assets of less than $2,028,000,000 on December 31, 2013, satisfied this criterion for purposes of the exemption during 2014.
3. For calendar year 2015, the asset threshold was $2,060,000,000. Creditors that had total assets of less than $2,060,000,000 on December 31, 2014, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2015 and, if the creditor's assets together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2014 were less than that amount, for purposes of any loan consummated in 2016 for which the application was received before April 1, 2016.
4. For calendar year 2016, the asset threshold was $2,052,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2015 had total assets of less than $2,052,000,000 on December 31, 2015, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2016 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2017 for which the application was received before April 1, 2017.
5. For calendar year 2017, the asset threshold was $2,069,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2016 had total assets of less than $2,069,000,000 on December 31, 2016, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2017 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2018 for which the application was received before April 1, 2018.
6. For calendar year 2018, the asset threshold was $2,112,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2017 had total assets of less than $2,112,000,000 on December 31, 2017, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2018 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2019 for which the application was received before April 1, 2019.
7. For calendar year 2019, the asset threshold was $2,167,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2018 had total assets of less than $2,167,000,000 on December 31, 2018, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2019 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2020 for which the application was received before April 1, 2020.
8. For calendar year 2020, the asset threshold was $2,202,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2019 had total assets of less than $2,202,000,000 on December 31, 2019, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2020 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2021 for which the application was received before April 1, 2021.
9. For calendar year 2021, the asset threshold was $2,230,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2020 had total assets of less than $2,230,000,000 on December 31, 2020, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2021 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2022 for which the application was received before April 1, 2022.
10. For calendar year 2022, the asset threshold was $2,336,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2021 had total assets of less than $2,336,000,000 on December 31, 2021, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2022 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2023 for which the application was received before April 1, 2023.
11. For calendar year 2023, the asset threshold was $2,537,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2022 had total assets of less than $2,537,000,000 on December 31, 2022, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2023 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2024 for which the application was received before April 1, 2024.
12. For calendar year 2024, the asset threshold was $2,640,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2023 had total assets of less than $2,640,000,000 on December 31, 2023, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2024 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2025 for which the application was received before April 1, 2025.
13. For calendar year 2025, the asset threshold was $2,717,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2024 had total assets of less than $2,717,000,000 on December 31, 2024, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2025 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2026 for which the application was received before April 1, 2026.
iv. The creditor and its affiliates do not maintain an escrow account for any mortgage transaction being serviced by the creditor or its affiliate at the time the transaction is consummated, except as provided in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(D)( 1 ) and ( 2 ). Thus, the exemption applies, provided the other conditions of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) (or, if applicable, the conditions for the exemption in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi)) are satisfied, even if the creditor previously maintained escrow accounts for mortgage loans, provided it no longer maintains any such accounts except as provided in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(D)( 1 ) and ( 2 ). Once a creditor or its affiliate begins escrowing for loans currently serviced other than those addressed in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(D)( 1 ) and ( 2 ), however, the creditor and its affiliate become ineligible for the exemption in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) and (vi) on higher-priced mortgage loans they make while such escrowing continues. Thus, as long as a creditor (or its affiliate) services and maintains escrow accounts for any mortgage loans, other than as provided in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(D)( 1 ) and ( 2 ), the creditor will not be eligible for the exemption for any higher-priced mortgage loan it may make. For purposes of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) and (vi), a creditor or its affiliate “maintains” an escrow account only if it services a mortgage loan for which an escrow account has been established at least through the due date of the second periodic payment under the terms of the legal obligation.
* * * * *

Paragraph 35(b)(2)(vi)(A)
1. The asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi)(A) will adjust automatically each year, based on the year-to-year change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars. Unlike the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii) and the other thresholds in § 1026.35(b)(2)(vi), affiliates are not considered in calculating compliance with this threshold. The Bureau will publish notice of the asset threshold each year by amending this comment. For calendar year 2026, the asset threshold is $12,485,000,000. A creditor that is an insured depository institution or insured credit union that during calendar year 2025 had assets of $12,485,000,000 or less on December 31, 2025, satisfies this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2026 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2027 for which the application was received before April 1, 2027. For historical purposes:
1. For calendar year 2021, the asset threshold was $10,000,000,000. Creditors that had total assets of 10,000,000,000 or less on December 31, 2020, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2021 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2022 for which the application was received before April 1, 2022.
2. For calendar year 2022, the asset threshold was $10,473,000,000. Creditors that had total assets of $10,473,000,000 or less on December 31, 2021, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2022 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2023 for which the application was received before April 1, 2023.
3. For calendar year 2023, the asset threshold was $11,374,000,000. A creditor that is an insured depository institution or insured credit union that during calendar year 2022 had assets of $11,374,000,000 or less on December 31, 2022, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2023 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2024 for which the application was received before April 1, 2024.
4. For calendar year 2024, the asset threshold was $11,835,000,000. A creditor that is an insured depository institution or insured credit union that during calendar year 2023 had assets of $11,835,000,000 or less on December 31, 2023, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2024 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2025 for which the application was received before April 1, 2025.
5. For calendar year 2025, the asset threshold was $12,179,000,000. A creditor that is an insured depository institution or insured credit union that during calendar year 2024 had assets of $12,179,000,000 or less on December 31, 2024, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2025 and for purposes of any loan secured by a first lien on a principal dwelling of a consumer consummated in 2026 for which the application was received before April 1, 2026.
* * * * *
Russell Vought,

Acting Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 117, 147, and 165
[Docket No. USCG-2025-0345]
2024 Quarterly Listings: First Quarter; Safety Zones, Security Zones, and Special Local Regulations

AGENCY:
Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:
Notification of expired temporary rules issued.

SUMMARY:
This document provides notification of substantive rules issued by the Coast Guard that were made temporarily effective but expired before they could be published in the Federal Register . This document lists temporary safety zones, security zones, and special local regulations, all of limited duration and for which timely publication in the Federal Register was not possible. This document also announces notifications of enforcement for existing reoccurring regulations that we issued but were unable to be published before the enforcement period ended.

DATES:
This document lists temporary Coast Guard rules and notifications of enforcement that became effective, primarily between January 2024 and March 2024, and expired before they could be published in the Federal Register .

ADDRESSES:
Temporary rules listed in this document may be viewed online, under their respective docket numbers at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For questions on this document contact Ambar Ali, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, email HQS-SMB-CG-LRA-Admin@uscg.mil, telephone (202) 372-3862.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Coast Guard District Commanders and Captains of the Port (COTP) must be immediately responsive to the safety and security needs within their jurisdiction; therefore, District Commanders and COTPs have been delegated the authority to issue certain local regulations. Safety zones may be established for safety or environmental purposes. A safety zone may be stationary and described by fixed limits or it may be described as a zone around a vessel in motion. Security zones limit access to prevent injury or damage to vessels, ports, or waterfront facilities. Special local regulations are issued to enhance the safety of participants and spectators at regattas and other marine events.
Timely publication of these rules in the Federal Register may be precluded when a rule responds to an emergency, or when an event occurs without sufficient advance notice. The affected public is, however, often informed of these rules through Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Local Notices to Mariners, press releases, and other means. Moreover, actual notification is often provided by Coast Guard patrol vessels enforcing the restrictions imposed by the rule. Timely publication of notifications of enforcement of reoccurring regulations may be precluded when the event occurs with short notice or other agency procedural restraints.
Because Federal Register publication was not possible before the end of the effective period, mariners would have been notified of the contents of these safety zones, security zones, special local regulations, regulated navigation areas, or drawbridge operation regulations by Coast Guard officials prior to any enforcement action. However, the Coast Guard, by law, must publish in the Federal Register notice of substantive rules adopted. To meet this obligation without imposing undue expense on the public, the Coast Guard periodically publishes a list of these temporary safety zones, security zones, special local regulations, regulated navigation areas and drawbridge operation regulations. Permanent rules are not included in this list because they are published in their entirety in the Federal Register . Temporary rules are also published in their entirety if sufficient time is available to do so before they are placed in effect or terminated. In some of our reoccurring regulations, we say we will publish a notice of enforcement as one of the means of notifying the public. We use this notification to announce those notifications of enforcement that we issued and will post them to their dockets.
The following unpublished rules were placed in effect temporarily during the period between January 2024 and March 2024. To view copies of these rules, visit www.regulations.gov and search by the docket number indicated in the following table.
Docket No. | Type | Location | Effective date
USCG-2023-0018 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Miami, FL | 1/1/2024
USCG-2023-0913 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | San Diego, CA | 1/1/2024
USCG-2024-0080 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | St. Clair River, MI | 1/20/2024
USCG-2024-0074 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Ingleside, TX | 1/22/2024
USCG-2024-0125 | Security Zones (Part 165) | Jupiter, FL | 1/30/2024
USCG-2024-0133 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Ingleside, TX | 2/11/2024
USCG-2024-0001 | Security Zones (Part 165) | Beaver, PA | 2/16/2024
USCG-2024-0129 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Arkansas River, Ozark, AR | 2/20/2024
USCG-2024-0164 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | San Diego, CA | 2/20/2024
USCG-2024-0165 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | San Diego, CA | 2/20/2024
USCG-2024-0051 | Security Zones (Part 165) | San Francisco, CA | 2/21/2024
USCG-2024-0060 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Miami, FL | 2/24/2024
| USCG-2024-0179 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Savannah, GA | 3/1/2024
USCG-2024-0107 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Houston, TX | 3/2/2024
USCG-2024-0210 | Security Zones (Part 165) | Milwaukee, WI | 3/13/2024
USCG-2024-0211 | Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) | Huntington Beach, CA | 3/15/2024
Michael Cunningham,

Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States Coast Guard.
91
4
Wednesday, January 7, 2026
Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2025-5402; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00425-T]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-401 and -402 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple in-service reports of cracks in elevator power control unit (PCU) brackets (fittings) and the elevator front spar. This proposed AD would require replacing bushings and installing new washers on the elevator PCU arm fitting assembly, installing doublers at the front spar of the elevator structure assembly, replacing horizontal stabilizer rear spar elevator PCU fittings, and applicable on-conditions actions. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:
The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 23, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202-493-2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5402; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Material Incorporated by Reference:
• For Transport Canada material identified in this proposed AD, contact Transport Canada, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone 888-663-3639; email TC.AirworthinessDirectives-Consignesdenavigabilite.TC@tc.gc.ca . You may find this material on the Transport Canada website at tc.canada.ca/en/aviation. It is also available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5402.
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yaser Osman, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228 7300; email: 9-avs-nyaco-cos@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments using a method listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2025-5402; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00425-T” at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposal because of those comments.
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Yaser Osman, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228 7300; email: 9-avs-nyaco-cos@faa.gov. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background
Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19, dated March 24, 2025 (Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-401, and -402 airplanes. The MCAI states there have been reports of multiple instances of in-service cracking in the elevator PCU brackets (fittings) located on the horizontal stabilizer rear spar, as well as four cases of cracking on the elevator front spar. In one case, the cracking progressed to the point where the PCU bracket detached. An investigation determined that the common contributing factor in all cases was force-fight loads generated during elevator movement by the PCUs. Potential root causes identified include elevator system mis-rigging, improper clamping of PCU brackets due to insufficient shimming, and misalignment of the horizontal stabilizer and elevator hinges during assembly.
The FAA is proposing this AD to address cracks in elevator PCU brackets (fittings) and the elevator front spar, which could result in failure of an elevator PCU bracket and lead to an elevator jam. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could, if both elevators are affected, result in the loss of pitch control. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5402.

Terminating Action Explanation for Related Transport Canada AD
This NPRM would require the actions specified in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19. Accomplishment of certain actions would then terminate inspections required by Transport Canada AD CF-2024-10, dated March 1, 2024, which corresponds to FAA AD 2025-19-05, Amendment 39-23145 (90 FR 46340, September 26, 2025) (AD 2025-19-05). Paragraph (j) of AD 2025-19-05 provides the terminating action that corresponds to the terminating action specified in paragraph C. of Part I and paragraph D. of Part II of Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19.

Material Incorporated by Reference Under 1 CFR Part 51
Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies the following procedures:
• Replacing bushings and installing new washers on the elevator PCU arm fitting assembly, which includes inspecting bushing holes in the arm fitting assembly for corrosion, scoring, and structural degradation ( i.e., hole diameters are not within specified diameters).
• Installing doublers between ribs 12 and 13 and between ribs 13 and 14 at the front spar of the elevator structure assembly and applicable on-condition actions. The installation includes a detailed visual inspection of the elevator front spar caps and detailed inspection of the upper skin panel for damage ( i.e., cracking or corrosion), a bolt hole eddy current inspection for cracking at certain fastener holes, a high frequency eddy current for radial cracking at bend radius of certain rib lightening holes, and an inspection of the pressure sensitive lightening tape on certain lightening holes for missing or torn tape. On-condition actions include contacting the DHC technical helpdesk for an approved repair, contacting DHC technical helpdesk for support, and replacing pressure sensitive lightening tape with new tape.
• Replacing horizontal stabilizer rear spar elevator PCU fittings, which includes an eddy current inspection, if fittings are removed, for cracking at all mating holes on the spar web assembly and the lower skin.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination
These products have been approved by the civil aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, that authority has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD. See “Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Referenced Material” for a discussion of the general differences included in this AD.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Referenced Material
The material referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies inspecting bushing holes in the arm fitting assembly for corrosion, scoring, and structural degradation; however, it does not specify corrective action if any corrosion, scoring, and structural degradation is found. Therefore, this proposed AD would require, if any corrosion, scoring, and structural degradation is found, doing a repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO).
The material referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies replacing pressure sensitive lightening tape if required; however, it does not specify the conditions that would require replacement. Therefore, this proposed AD would require replacing the pressure sensitive lightening tape if tape is missing or torn.
The material referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies inspecting mating holes on the spar web assembly and the lower skin for cracking; however, it does not specify corrective action if any cracking is found. Therefore, this proposed AD would require, if any cracking is found, doing a repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada DAO.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information
In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the FAA proposes to incorporate Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 in its entirety through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD. Material required by Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5402 after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance
The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would affect 54 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs for Required Actions
Labor cost | Parts cost | Cost per product | Cost on U.S. operators
Up to 81 work-hours × $85 per hour = $6,885 | Up to $14,233 | Up to $21,118 | Up to $1,140,372.
The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings
The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive:
De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2025-5402; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00425-T.

(a) Comments Due Date
The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) by February 23, 2026.

(b) Affected ADs
None.

(c) Applicability
This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (type certificate previously held by Bombardier, Inc.) Model DHC-8-401 and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19, dated March 24, 2025 (Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19).

(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by multiple in-service reports of cracks found in the elevator power control unit (PCU) brackets (fittings) and the elevator front spar. The FAA is issuing this AD to address such cracks, which could result in failure of an elevator PCU bracket and lead to an elevator jam. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could, if both elevators are affected, result in the loss of pitch control.

(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(g) Requirements
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19.

(h) Exception to Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19
(1) Where Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 refers to hours air time, this AD requires using flight hours.
(3) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any corrosion, scoring, or structural degradation of the bushing holes in arm fitting assembly is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.
(4) Where the material referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies contacting the DHC technical helpdesk for an approved repair or support, for this AD, a repair must be done before further flight using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.
(5) Where the material referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19 specifies replacing pressure sensitive lightening tape if required, for this AD, replace the pressure sensitive lightening tape before further flight if tape is missing or torn.
(6) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any cracking at any mating hole on the spar web assembly or the lower skin is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(i) Additional AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD and email to: AMOC@faa.gov . Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's Transport Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(j) Additional Information
For more information about this AD, contact Yaser Osman, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; email 9-avs-nyaco-cos@faa.gov.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Transport Canada AD CF-2025-19, dated March 24, 2025.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For Transport Canada material identified in this AD, contact Transport Canada, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone 888-663-3639; email TC.AirworthinessDirectives-Consignesdenavigabilite.TC@tc.gc.ca. You may find this material on the Transport Canada website at tc.canada.ca/en/aviation.
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations or email fr.inspection@nara.gov.
Issued on December 31, 2025.
Christopher R. Parker,

Acting Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2025-5404; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00424-T]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Aerospace LP Airplanes

AGENCY:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Gulfstream Aerospace LP (GALP) Model Gulfstream G280 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of the accumulation of water in electrical connectors located in the aft fuselage directly below the empennage, resulting in empennage flight control related crew alerting system (CAS) messages. This proposed AD would require retrofitting the flight controls empennage electrical harness. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:
The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 23, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202-493-2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5404; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Material Incorporated by Reference:
• For Civil Aviation Authority of Israel (CAAI) material identified in this proposed AD, contact: CAAI, P.O. Box 1101, Golan Street, Airport City, 70100, Israel; telephone 972-3-9774665; fax 972-3-9774592; email aip@mot.gov.il. You may find this material on the CAAI website at www.gov.il/en/pages/israeli-airworthiness-directives. It is also available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5404.
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Bolden, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 404-474-5592; email richard.bolden@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments using a method listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2025-5404; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00424-T” at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposal because of those comments.
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Richard Bolden, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 404-474-5592; email richard.bolden@faa.gov. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background
The CAAI, which is the aviation authority for Israel, has issued CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1, dated August 28, 2025 (CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain GALP Model G280 airplanes. The MCAI states that several reports of empennage flight control related CAS messages have been attributed to the accumulation of water in electrical connectors located in the aft fuselage directly below the empennage. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could, in combination with various specific failures or scenarios, result in loss of controllability of the airplane.
The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5404.

Material Incorporated by Reference Under 1 CFR Part 51
CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 specifies procedures for retrofitting the flight controls empennage electrical harness by replacing the backshells of electrical connectors at the vertical tail compartment.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination
These products have been approved by the civil aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, that authority has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information
In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the FAA proposes to incorporate CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 in its entirety through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD. Material required by CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2025-5404 after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance
The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would affect 140 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs for Required Actions
Labor cost | Parts cost | Cost per product | Cost on U.S. operators
80 work-hours × $85 per hour = $6,800 | $3,200 | $10,000 | $1,400,000
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings
The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive:
Gulfstream Aerospace LP: Docket No. FAA-2025-5404; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-00424-T.

(a) Comments Due Date
The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) by February 23, 2026.

(b) Affected ADs
None.

(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Gulfstream Aerospace LP Model Gulfstream G280 airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Civil Aviation Authority of Israel (CAAI) AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1, dated August 28, 2025 (CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1).

(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight Controls.

(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by reports of the accumulation of water in electrical connectors located in the aft fuselage directly below the empennage, resulting in empennage flight control related crew alerting system (CAS) messages. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the accumulation of water in electrical connectors located in the aft fuselage directly below the empennage. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could, in combination with various specific failures or scenarios, result in loss of controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(g) Requirements
Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1.

(h) Exceptions to CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1
Where CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement
Although the material referenced in CAAI AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

(j) Additional AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD and email to: AMOC@faa.gov . Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or CAAI; or CAAI's authorized Designee. If approved by the CAAI Designee, the approval must include the Designee's authorized signature.

(k) Additional Information
For more information about this AD, contact Richard Bolden, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 404-474-5592; email: richard.bolden@faa.gov.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Civil Aviation Authority of Israel (CAAI) AD ISR I-27-2025-03-06 R1, dated August 28, 2025.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For CAAI material identified in this AD, contact CAAI, P.O. Box 1101, Golan Street, Airport City, 70100, Israel; telephone 972-3-9774665; fax 972-3-9774592; email aip@mot.gov.il. You may find this material on the CAAI website at www.gov.il/en/pages/israeli-airworthiness-directives.
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations or email fr.inspection@nara.gov.
Issued on January 2, 2026.
Christopher R. Parker,

Acting Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 91, 121, and 129
[Docket No.: FAA-2025-5666; Notice No. 26-02]
RIN 2120-AM21
Requirements for Interference-Tolerant Radio Altimeter Systems

AGENCY:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY:
In July 2025, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Section 40002 of that law re-institutes the Federal Communications Commission's general auction authority and specifically directs the Commission to complete a system of competitive bidding for not less than 100 megahertz in the 3.98-4.2 gigahertz band (Upper C-band). To ensure safe, efficient, and reliable aviation operations in the presence of wireless signals in the Upper C-band, the Federal Aviation Administration is proposing new regulations that would require all radio altimeters to meet specific minimum performance requirements. These new radio altimeters must withstand interference from wireless signals in neighboring spectrum bands and continue to provide accurate altitude readings to both pilots and integrated aircraft safety systems. The minimum interference tolerance requirements proposed in this rule reflect the best achievable interference rejection using current technology without compromising radio altimeter system performance. These regulations would require all aircraft equipped with radio altimeters operating under part 121 and those aircraft with radio altimeters operating under part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds to comply with the minimum performance requirements by the date the Federal Communications Commission authorizes wireless services in the Upper C-band. All other aircraft equipped with radio altimeters would be required to comply with the same minimum performance requirements two years later. This proposed rule is a companion to the Federal Communications Commission's NPRM to expand the ecosystem for next-generation wireless services in the 3.7-4.2 gigahertz band by making as much as 180, and at least 100, megahertz of the Upper C-band available for terrestrial wireless flexible use via a system of competitive bidding.

DATES:
Send comments on or before March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2025-5666 using any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
• Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at (202) 493-2251.
Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Fox, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, AFS-400, Federal Aviation Administration, 6500 S MacArthur Blvd., Building 26, Suite 217, Oklahoma City, OK 73169; telephone (847) 294-7546; email mark.e.fox@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used in This Document
AC—Advisory Circular
AD—Airworthiness Directive
ADS-B—Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast
AGL—Above Ground Level
AIP—Aeronautical Information Publication
AMOC—Alternative Method of Compliance
BLS—Bureau of Labor Statistics
CAA—Civil Aviation Authority
CAT—Category (CAT II, CAT III)
C-band—3.7-4.2 GHz frequency band
CBI—Confidential Business Information
CFIT—Controlled Flight Into Terrain
CFR—Code of Federal Regulations
CMA—C-band Mitigation Airport
CPI-U— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers
dB—Decibel
dBm—Decibel-milliwatts
dBm/MHz—Decibel-milliwatts per megahertz
dBW/m2/MHz—Decibel-watts per square meter per megahertz
DOT—Department of Transportation
EA—Environmental Assessment
EFVS—Enhanced Flight Vision Systems
EGPWS—Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System
EIRP—Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
EIS—Environmental Impact Statement
E.O.—Executive Order
EUROCAE—European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment
FAA—Federal Aviation Administration
FCC—Federal Communications Commission
FOIA—Freedom of Information Act
FR—Federal Register
GA—General Aviation
GHz—Gigahertz
GPS—Global Positioning System
GPWS—Ground Proximity Warning System
HAA—Helicopter Air Ambulance
HTAWS—Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning System
IBA—International Bureau of Aviation
ICAO—International Civil Aviation Organization
IRFA—Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
ITM—Interference Tolerance Mask
Lower C-band—3.70-3.98 GHz frequency band
MHz—Megahertz
MOPS—Minimum Operating Performance Standards
MPS—Minimum Performance Standards
MSD—Minimum Separation Distance
NAICS—North American Industrial Classification System
NAS—National Airspace System
NM—Nautical Mile
NOI—Notice of Inquiry
NOTAM—Notice to Airmen
NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NVG—Night Vision Goggles
OCS—Obstacle Clearance Surface
OEM—Original Equipment Manufacturer
OMB—Office of Management and Budget
PFD—Power Flux Density
R & O—Report and Order
RA—Radio Altimeter (also known as Radar Altimeter)
RA Band—4.2-4.4 GHz frequency band
RF—Radio Frequency
RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFI—Radio Frequency Interference
RIA—Regulatory Impact Analysis
RMS—Root Mean Square
SA CAT—Special Authorization Category (SA CAT I, SA CAT II)
SBA—Small Business Administration
SC-239—RTCA Special Committee 239
TAWS—Terrain Awareness and Warning System
TCAS—Traffic Collision Avoidance System
TD—Touchdown
TSO—Technical Standard Order
UAS—Unmanned Aircraft Systems
UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Upper C-band—3.98-4.2 GHz frequency band
VSL—Value of a Statistical Life
WG-119—EUROCAE Working Group 119

Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Overview of Proposed Rule
B. Statement of the Problem
C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
III. Background
IV. Discussion of the Proposal
A. Broadband Objective
B. Radio Altimeter Operation and Application
C. Current RA Limitations
D. Next Generation RA Capability
E. Proposed Regulation and Retrofit Requirements
1. Scope—Aircraft Affected
2. Schedule—Availability of Next Generation RA
3. Part 121 Air Carriers and Large Part 129 Aircraft
4. All Other Aircraft
5. Safety Analysis of the Proposed Minimum Performance Requirements
F. Safety Analysis for Wireless Access Prior to the Initial RA Performance Deadline
G. Lower C-Band Mitigations
H. Relationship to Airworthiness Directives and Other FAA Policy
I. Alternatives Considered
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Statement of the Need for the Proposed Action
i. Description of the Problem
ii. Need for Regulation
iii. Summary of the Proposed Regulation
2. Baseline for the Analysis
3. Benefits
4. Costs
5. Alternatives to Proposed Rule
6. Summary
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
1. Reasons the Action Is Being Considered
2. Objectives and Legal Basis of the Proposed Rule
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities
4. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
5. All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
6. Significant Alternatives Considered
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. International Compatibility
G. Environmental Analysis
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska
VI. E.O. Determinations
A. E.O. 13132, Federalism
B. E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
C. E.O. 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
D. E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation
E. E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
VII. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
B. Confidential Business Information
C. Electronic Access and Filing
D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
VIII. The Proposed Amendment

I. Executive Summary

A. Overview of Proposed Rule
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing new regulations that would require all radio (also known as radar) altimeter (RA) systems ^1 on aircraft operating under title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia to meet minimum performance requirements necessary to withstand interference from wireless services in at least 100 megahertz (MHz) of the 3.98-4.2 gigahertz (GHz) frequency band (Upper C-band), which is immediately adjacent to the RA frequency band. FAA is proposing two compliance dates. RA systems on aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 121, and on aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds, would be required to meet the new minimum performance requirements by the date the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Report and Order (R&O) authorizes wireless service in the Upper C-band. All RA systems on other aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia would be required to meet the new minimum performance requirements two years after the date FCC authorizes wireless service in the Upper C-band. As discussed in the proposal, FAA expects the initial RA performance deadline will be achievable between 2029 and 2032, based on a variety of factors. The proposed timeline for this retrofit is intended to reflect the urgency of expanding next-generation wireless services in accomplishing the equipment development and retrofit with acceptable schedule risk. The final RA system performance deadlines, within the proposed timeframe, will be informed by the comments to this proposal. These new regulations would require the installation of new or upgraded RA systems for all aircraft currently equipped with RA operating under part 121; the majority of aircraft operating under parts 91 subpart K, 125, 129, 135, and 194; and a minority of general aviation (GA) aircraft operating under part 91. Aircraft that are not currently equipped with an RA would not need to replace or upgrade their RA system.

B. Statement of the Problem
RAs measure an aircraft's height above terrain and obstacles using low-powered signals in the 4.2-4.4 GHz frequency band (RA band). Wireless signals in the neighboring spectrum bands may interfere with RA systems and cause inaccurate altitude readings. New RA systems must be able to withstand interference from higher-powered wireless signals in neighboring spectrum bands and spurious emissions from those wireless base stations into the RA band, and continue to provide accurate altitude readings. Accurate RA data is critical for pilots as well as integrated automation, navigation, and safety systems, including autoland, rotorcraft automation modes, and systems that alert pilots of immediate hazards such as terrain, windshear, and traffic. This is particularly critical when the pilot cannot see the runway in low-visibility conditions. Anomalous RA inputs to these systems may cause the aircraft to maneuver in an unexpected or hazardous manner at a very low altitude during the final stages of approach and landing or may prevent collision alerting technology from functioning properly. The pilot might not be able to detect the error or adjust the flight path in time to maintain safe flight and landing, which could result in catastrophic outcomes, including aircraft accidents that may be fatal.
FCC issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) ^2 in February 2025 to signal its intent to auction spectrum for more intensive use in the Upper C-band, which is immediately adjacent to the RA band. This NOI also sought comments on whether to adopt service rules similar to those in the 3.7-3.98 GHz band (Lower C-band). The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, Public Law 119-21, ^3 signed on July 4, 2025, requires FCC to auction at least 100 MHz in the Upper C-band by July 4, 2027. Pursuant to this requirement, FCC has proposed to further expand the ecosystem for next-generation wireless services in the 3.7-4.2 GHz band (C-band) by making as much as 180, and at least 100, megahertz of the Upper C-band available for terrestrial wireless flexible use via a system of competitive bidding. ^4
FAA expects future wireless services in the Upper C-band aligned with service rules in the Lower C-band to cause interference to current RA systems. Existing RA systems are not compatible with this envisioned use, and airworthiness directives (AD) issued by FAA in 2023 are insufficient to address the unsafe condition that will result from wireless services in the Upper C-band. In addition, existing RA systems are currently operating with reduced capabilities. Several ADs currently restrict operations to resolve the unsafe conditions caused by wireless services in the Lower C-band. Voluntary measures were adopted by the wireless service providers to minimize the national economic impact of restrictions by coordinating the power level of wireless services in the Lower C-band and ensuring airport access for air carriers at major airports. ^5 The voluntary commitments sunset on January 1, 2028, unless extended or reduced by mutual agreement, and long-term compatibility between Lower C-band wireless services and RA systems has not been resolved beyond that date. In addition to the unsafe conditions that have been addressed through ADs, safety-enhancing systems such as Traffic Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS) and Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (TAWS) may not operate reliably in close proximity to the Lower or Upper C-band wireless base stations.
A single retrofit of RA systems can address long-term compatibility with wireless in both the Lower and Upper C-band. The aviation industry has been developing standards for next-generation RA systems for several years. A joint industry committee, RTCA, Inc Special Committee 239 (SC-239) ^6 and the European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE) Working Group 119 (WG-119), ^7 is developing an industry standard to define the maximum safely tolerable radio frequency interference (RFI) environment for RA systems. This avionics standard is scheduled for publication in early 2027. The wireless and aviation industries are also engaged in ongoing discussions about how to promote effective coexistence between RA systems and new terrestrial wireless services in the Upper C-band. ^8
FAA is proposing new regulations that would require all aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia and equipped with RAs to upgrade to RA systems that meet minimum interference tolerance requirements that reflect the best achievable interference rejection using current technology and without compromising the RA system performance. These new RA systems must provide accurate altitude readings to pilots and integrated safety systems in the presence of the defined interference environment. The goal of these proposed regulations is to minimize the impact on the safety, efficiency, and reliability of aviation operations as a result of the Presidential ^9 and Congressional goals of increased wireless and broadband access for the American people.

C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
RA systems are integral to aviation safety by providing altitude information directly to pilots and to safety systems that need accurate information to function properly. Besides the importance of pilots having accurate height over terrain information in low visibility conditions, RA data is vital for the proper functioning of safety systems such as TCAS, TAWS, and other aircraft-specific functions, which historically have reduced the risk of airline crashes in the United States significantly. ^{10} Upgrading to new interference-tolerant RA systems would allow RAs and their dependent safety systems to continue to play their important role in ensuring safe aircraft operations in the National Airspace System (NAS).
FAA is proposing two compliance dates for RA retrofits. FAA considered several factors in proposing a staggered compliance schedule, including the role the operations play in the economy, expected level of safety, and the expected availability of RA units. The initial RA performance deadline would apply to all aircraft equipped with an RA operating under part 121 and aircraft equipped with an RA operating under part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds. FAA would require an earlier compliance date for part 121 and 129 operations because they constitute flights by the major domestic and international airlines and affect the majority of the flying public, have the highest public expectation of safety, and are the most critical to the national economy.
Any other aircraft operating in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia equipped with an RA would have two additional years from the first compliance date to retrofit with an RA system that meets the proposed performance requirement. As necessary, FAA would supersede the current ADs to impose operating limitations on the use of RAs that do not meet the proposed performance requirements until such time as the RA system is replaced. The superseding ADs would address operators who have upgraded to a Lower C-band interference-tolerant RA, but do not upgrade to an RA system compliant with the proposed rule prior to the initial compliance date (see section IV-H).
In order to properly evaluate a regulation, agencies must measure its costs and benefits against a baseline. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-4 defines the “no action” baseline as “the best assessment of the way the world would look absent the proposed action.” FAA considers the primary baseline for this analysis to be a no action baseline, in which FAA assumes FCC completes the auction required by Public Law 119-21 and the voluntary commitments of the wireless service providers lapse. Under this scenario, FAA would have to react to the interference to prohibit all operations of certain aircraft makes and models, as well as prohibit low-visibility operations in all aircraft, causing significant operational impacts. Aircraft owners would need to replace their RA systems to achieve compatibility with the new spectrum environment. The inherent costs of delays, cancellations, and groundings resulting from re-imposing AD operational prohibitions under this no action baseline can be negated by the cost of retrofitting the RA system in compliance with proposed performance standards.
FAA also considers an alternative pre-C-band utilization baseline, in which FAA does not account for the inherent costs of delays, cancellations, and groundings resulting from AD operational prohibitions that would be necessary due to the proposed Upper C-band auction or expiration of the voluntary wireless commitments. Relative to this baseline, FAA estimates the total undiscounted cost to retrofit with interference-tolerant RA units is $4.49 billion, or $424 million annualized at a 7 percent discount rate over 20 years, ^{11} as shown in Table 1.
Table 1—Cost of RA Retrofit Relative to Pre-C-Band Utilization Baseline
[Millions of 2025$]
CFR operational part | Undiscounted total cost | Annualized costs ^1 | 3% Discount rate | 7% Discount rate
Part 91 | $1,589 | $107 | $150
Part 121 | 1,363 | 92 | 129
Part 129 | 891 | 60 | 84
Part 135 | 651 | 44 | 61
Total | 4,494 | 302 | 424
Notes: Columns may not sum due to rounding.
^1 Costs are annualized over a 20-year period, estimated to be the average remaining service life for current fleet aircraft.

II. Authority for This Rulemaking
FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of FAA's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the authority of the Administrator to promulgate and revise regulations and rules related to aviation safety. This rulemaking is also issued under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, FAA is charged with prescribing regulations promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce.
This regulation is within the scope of this authority. This proposed rule will ensure continued safety after completion of FCC's auction of at least 100 MHz of spectrum in the band immediately adjacent to the RA spectrum band, which Public Law 119-21 requires to be completed by July 4, 2027. The requirement for an RA system retrofit is necessary due to FCC's anticipated auction and is also needed to support continued safety with respect to Lower C-band wireless services.

III. Background
Aircraft rely on RA systems to measure height above terrain and obstacles in all phases of flight. The RA provides this information to the pilot and to the aircraft's interconnected navigation and safety systems to support functions such as low-visibility approaches and landings, terrain awareness and alerting, wind shear detection and recovery, aircraft collision avoidance, automated rotorcraft systems, and other flight control systems. The safety and efficiency of flight depend heavily on RAs providing accurate inputs to these systems. For example, automatic and manual flight guidance systems on airplanes rely on RA data to facilitate low-visibility operations such as autoland and guidance provided for manual landing using a Head Up Display to touchdown (TD) when conducting Category (CAT) II, CAT III, Special Authorization (SA) CAT I, SA CAT II or Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) to TD operations. These inputs determine when and where the pilot or automation system flares for landing ( i.e., raising the aircraft's nose just before touchdown to smooth touchdown), when power reductions are made for landing, and when other control inputs are made. On helicopters, automatic and/or manual flight guidance systems rely on accurate RA height data to facilitate low-visibility operations such as Category A and Category B takeoff operations.
Accurate RA readings are critical for all of these applications. Inaccurate altitude information from an RA experiencing signal interference from higher-powered wireless services in neighboring frequency bands may give the pilot a false sense of the aircraft's position in the air and can cause missing or erroneous (anomalous) RA inputs to navigation and safety systems, potentially resulting in catastrophic consequences. For example, automated safety systems reading erroneous altitude information can cause the aircraft to make unexpected or hazardous maneuvers during the final stages of approach and landing, or prevent ground collision alerting technology from functioning properly. Importantly, the pilot might not be able to detect the error or adjust the flight path in time to maintain safe flight and landing, which could result in an accident with fatalities or injuries.
RA systems work by emitting and then detecting low-powered signals returning from the ground or other obstacles, similar to how radar works. The 4.2-4.4 GHz frequency band (RA band) is allocated for RA operational use in the U.S. and worldwide. Before 2020, satellite operators and other low-powered sources used the neighboring frequency bands, and their low-power signals in-band and out-of-band did not interfere with RAs. This changed when the Lower C-band was reallocated to permit high-powered commercial wireless services. ^{12} Though FCC limits apply differently for terrestrial and satellite-based services, as a comparison, previous low-powered satellite services were limited such that their signals were no greater than roughly -99 decibel-milliwatts (dBm) per MHz (dBm/MHz) at the Earth's surface, where current Lower C-band wireless base stations can transmit up to 65 dBm/MHz. This significant increase in signal power can interfere with the RA's ability to receive the low-power signal reflected off the ground or other obstacles. As a result, the RA can register incorrect data (or no data at all) unless the RA system can block or otherwise filter out this interference from neighboring spectrum bands and their unwanted emissions into the RA band.
In April 2020, RTCA formed a “5G Task Force,” including members from RTCA, FAA, aircraft and radio altimeter manufacturers, EUROCAE, industry organizations, and operators, to perform “a quantitative evaluation of radar altimeter performance regarding RF interference from expected 5G emissions in the 3.7-3.98 GHz band, as well as a detailed assessment of the risk of such interference occurring and impacting aviation safety” ^{13} that concludes there is a major risk that C-band signals can cause harmful interference to RA on all types of aircraft. The report further concludes that the likelihood and severity of radio frequency interference increases for operations at lower altitudes. That interference could cause the RA to either become inoperable or present misleading information, as well as affect associated systems on civil aircraft.
In late 2021, to address the unsafe conditions caused by interference from wireless services in the Lower C-band, FAA issued ADs prohibiting certain transport and commuter category airplane ^{14} and rotorcraft operations ^{15} that require RA data. FAA also issued airplane model-specific ADs ^{16} with additional restrictions to address unique safety issues for those airplanes. The FAA risk assessment for these ADs included consideration of the RTCA report, public comments to the RTCA report, and analyses from RA and aircraft manufacturers in support of the safety risk determination. The analyses FAA considered were consistent with RTCA's conclusions pertaining to RA interference from C-Band emissions. Some aircraft could not operate safely at all unless equipped with RA systems that are sufficiently resilient to potential spectrum interference. While the ADs addressed the unsafe conditions, the safety enhancements provided by RA systems have been compromised where an RA experiences interference. On January 19, 2022, FAA began tracking and analyzing reports of potential interference affecting RAs and integrated safety systems. As of August 19, 2025, FAA has received 659 reports of potential C-band interference, and 493 of these reports were associated with RAs or related systems. FAA has completed analysis of 625 of these reports and identified 118 events where all other potential sources were eliminated as likely causes and were potentially caused by C-band interference. Most of these 118 events consist of RA display errors, including erroneous altitude data, and/or nuisance alerts from integrated safety systems dependent on RA data to function properly. The quantity and details of reports received to date reflect the current spectrum environment defined by the wireless voluntary commitments and mitigations imposed by ADs to address the highest-risk operations. These reports demonstrate that wireless signals disrupt radar altimeters as predicted.
In January 2022, Verizon and AT&T (the first licensees to begin next-generation wireless services in the Lower C-band) agreed to limit wireless base station deployments and coordinate power levels around certain airports with FAA until July 1, 2023. The 2022 voluntary agreement provided the aviation industry time to find a solution to address the immediate, critical issue of increased risk of RA interference: to quickly develop, produce, and install modified RA systems that were tolerant to interference caused by Lower C-band signals. FAA worked collaboratively with RA and airframe manufacturers throughout 2022 to develop the aviation safety case that would allow a steady deployment of Lower C-band wireless base stations while avoiding unsafe conditions and preventing significant disruptions for aviation operations. Other types of operations and safety enhancements such as TAWS, which is intended to provide ground warning away from airports, have been disrupted by the current wireless deployment in the Lower C-band.
FAA conducted a series of flight tests in 2022, with cooperation from AT&T and Verizon, to measure real-world Lower C-band signal levels in an airspace. Each set of flights had unique goals and objectives, with each flight furthering FAA's understanding of how to measure C-band signals through an airspace. Lessons learned from each flight were incrementally incorporated into subsequent flights to improve measurement fidelity and accuracy. Flight locations were chosen strategically to extract maximal value based on the objectives and goals for each flight. Coordination with AT&T and Verizon preceded the flights to ensure FAA properly understood the wireless base station deployments relevant to each location. Technical interchanges between FAA, AT&T, and Verizon engineers helped to ensure the measurement procedures and equipment were properly suited for making accurate Lower C-band signal measurements from an aircraft. After each flight, measurement data and engineering analysis reports were shared with the associated wireless service provider to maximize transparency. While the primary objectives of each flight varied, FAA collected evidence during those flights showing ambient levels of fundamental Lower C-band signals that exceeded the interference tolerance of RA systems in use at the time. Both the raw and processed data associated with each of these flights were shared with AT&T and Verizon. The flight tests measured the signal present at the aircraft at multiple locations within the airspace and were not intended to observe real-world effects of Lower C-band signals on the performance of any specific RA or the test aircraft's equipped RA. These flights provided empirical evidence that it was possible for an airborne aircraft to experience Lower C-band signal levels that exceed the performance tolerance of unmodified RA equipment.
As of July 1, 2023, Verizon, AT&T, and the other 19 wireless service license holders ^{17} voluntarily committed to coordinate power levels and limit emissions into the RA band to minimize the disruption to air carrier operations until January 1, 2028. ^{18} FAA replaced its initial ADs with a second set of ADs to address the unsafe condition in the operating environment after July 1, 2023. AD 2023-10-02 ^{19} requires transport and commuter category airplanes to have a Lower C-band interference-tolerant RA suitable for the spectrum environment defined in the voluntary agreement to conduct certain low-visibility landings, and AD 2023-11-07 ^{20} contains similar requirements for rotorcraft. In addition, all airplanes operating under 14 CFR part 121 must have a Lower C-band interference-tolerant RA (or otherwise have an FAA-approved alternative method of compliance). FAA also replaced the existing airplane model-specific ADs with updated ADs, ^{21} and issued others where appropriate, ^{22} with additional restrictions to address issues affecting those specific airplanes. With the implementation of the 2023 ADs and other limitations relevant to part 129 foreign air carriers, the RAs on over 7,500 aircraft were modified to meet the Lower C-band tolerance that was prescribed. Some operators upgraded their RAs by adding supplemental filters, while other operators replaced their RA with one more resilient to potential interference in the Lower C-band.
When publishing these ADs, FAA noted they were an interim action until a new technical standard order (TSO) for RAs is established to incorporate new Minimum Operating Performance Standards (MOPS) that were in development. Currently, in accordance with the provisions in the ADs, FAA determines whether an RA is interference tolerant based on compatibility with the power limits in the voluntary agreements with the Lower C-band license holders, which temporarily reduces emissions through January 2028. However, these ADs do not address future next-generation wireless services in the Upper C-band and do not provide a long-term resolution that would ensure safety in the presence of Lower C-band wireless services.
A new industry standard for RA systems is being developed jointly by U.S. and European consensus bodies through RTCA SC-239 ^{23} and EUROCAE WG-119. ^{24} In 2020, RTCA/EUROCAE began developing a MOPS for RA systems that can tolerate interference from signals in neighboring spectrum bands. This joint industry committee has developed a draft standard, which is being validated through testing to ensure the proposed performance is achievable. Once the standard is validated, it will undergo a final public comment period and is planned for publication in March 2027. FAA has requested the committee publish the standard by June 2026, if possible, to align with FAA's anticipated timeline for publication of a final rule. The wireless and aviation industries are also engaged in ongoing discussions about how to promote effective coexistence between RA systems and new terrestrial wireless services in the Upper C-band. ^{25}
When the RTCA standard is complete, FAA anticipates recognizing the industry standard with new TSOs, which will provide a means for obtaining an FAA design and production approval for compliant equipment to facilitate aircraft equipage under this proposed rule. FAA will ensure that the TSOs conform to the interference tolerance mask (ITM) requirements in the final rule; any difference in the ITM of the industry standard will be corrected to conform to the FAA final rule by the implementing TSOs.

IV. Discussion of the Proposal

A. Broadband Objective To Meet Projected Spectrum Demand, Spur Economic Growth, and Advance American Security Interests
The 3.7-4.2 GHz band (C-band) is an ideal band for many next-generation advanced wireless services, including 5G, due to its desirable coverage, capacity, and propagation characteristics. As a result of previous efforts to expand access to the 3.7-3.98 GHz band, wireless operators have extensively deployed 5G throughout the continental United States, bringing enhanced services and increased connectivity to countless communities, including many in rural, remote, and underserved areas. Making additional spectrum available in the 3.98-4.2 GHz frequency range will expand on the success of these prior efforts to help meet projected demand for advanced wireless services, spur economic growth, and advance American security interests.
FCC issued an NOI in February 2025 to signal its intent to auction spectrum for next-generation wireless services in the Upper C-band, which is immediately adjacent to the RA band. While the Upper C-band presents a unique opportunity for commercial wireless expansion, it is even closer to the RA band than the current Lower C-band wireless services and poses a risk of increased interference with RAs and critical aviation systems dependent on the RA for accurate altitude data. FCC issued an NPRM to expand the ecosystem for next generation wireless services in the C-band by making as much as 180, and at least 100, MHz of the Upper C-band available for terrestrial wireless flexible use via a system of competitive bidding. FAA and FCC conducted extensive inter-agency coordination prior to the release of these respective NPRMs, with the goal of aligning aviation and wireless objectives in a way that leads to continued safe coexistence. This proposed expansion of wireless services should occur as early as possible while providing a high level of confidence that the proposed implementation dates are achievable to minimize the impact on the safety, efficiency, and reliability of aviation operations.

B. Radio Altimeter Operation and Application
The U.S. has the safest aviation system in the world, and an RA is an essential component that contributes to this enviable safety record. An RA measures aircraft height above terrain and obstacles in all phases of flight for tens of thousands of commercial aircraft, helicopters, business jets, GA aircraft, and future operations by powered-lift. An RA operates in the frequency band 4.2-4.4 GHz (RA band). The receiver on an RA is typically highly accurate, measuring height to within a few feet. An RA operates like radar and must detect faint signals reflected off the ground to measure altitude. The receiver must be able to isolate a reflected signal as low as approximately −120 dBm.
Automatic and manual flight guidance systems on airplanes rely on accurate RA data to facilitate autoland and operation in low-visibility conditions. An RA is critical equipment for conducting operations when the cloud base is less than 200 feet above the runway, and it is embedded within all types of CAT II, CAT III, and EFVS landing systems. An RA determines when and where the pilot or automation systems initiate the aircraft flare for landing, when power reductions are made for landing, and when other control inputs are made. This is critically important when the pilot cannot see the runway in low-visibility conditions. Anomalous RA inputs to these systems may cause the aircraft to maneuver in an unexpected or hazardous manner during the final stages of approach and landing, and may not be detectable by the pilot within sufficient time to maintain continued safe flight and landing. This could result in catastrophic outcomes, including aircraft accidents that may be fatal. Inaccurate RA data can also reduce pilot confidence in their instruments, eroding the foundation of all instrument flight training.
An RA is also integrated into several safety systems, starting with the TAWS. TAWS is an onboard aircraft system designed to prevent unintentional impact with the ground, commonly referred to as controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) accidents. An operable RA is a required element of TAWS. The accurate altitude provided by the RA is used to trigger an alarm in the flight deck when the aircraft is too low or there is an excessive closure rate to the ground. This system is required to generate alerts between 30 feet and 2,500 feet above ground level (AGL). ^{26} By definition, TAWS must be able to function everywhere, as there is no way to predict where a CFIT accident could occur. TAWS or predecessor safety equipment, such as ground proximity warning system (GPWS), has been required for over 50 years for many aircraft operations. In 1974, ^{27} FAA required all part 121 certificate holders and part 135 certificate holders operating large turbojet airplanes to install approved GPWS equipment. FAA extended the GPWS requirement to part 135 certificate holders operating turbojet-powered airplanes with 10 or more passenger seats in 1978, ^{28} and amended this requirement in 1992 ^{29} to require GPWS equipment on all turbine-powered airplanes (including turbo-propellor powered) with 10 or more passenger seats. Advances in terrain mapping technology permitted the development of enhanced GPWS (EGPWS), which provides greater situational awareness for flight crews, and FAA adopted the broader term TAWS to include a variety of systems that would meet improved standards beginning in March 2000. ^{30} The look-ahead feature of TAWS provides the flight crew with an earlier aural and visual warning of impending terrain based on Global Positioning System (GPS), forward-looking capability, and continued operation in the landing configuration, all of which provide more time for the flight crew to make smoother and gradual corrective action. When GPS is not available, such as during scheduled testing or other interference events, the GPWS alerts are still provided to the pilots.
An RA is also used within TCAS. In 1987, Congress mandated in Public Law 100-223 ^{31} that FAA require aircraft with more than 30 seats to have TCAS. FAA issued new regulations in 1989 ^{32} requiring TCAS by December 1991 for all airplanes with 30 or more seats operating under 14 CFR parts 121, 125, and 129, and by December 1995 for all part 129 and part 135 aircraft with 10 or more seats. The TCAS mandate was expanded to include cargo airplanes in 2004, ^{33} specifically requiring TCAS equipment on all airplanes over 33,000 pounds, with both requirements applicable to operations under parts 121, 125, and 129. In 2003, ^{34} new regulations for fractional aircraft ownership programs and on-demand operations included TCAS requirements for all aircraft operating under part 91, subpart K. TCAS depends on data provided by a properly functioning RA when below 2,350 feet AGL. If the aircraft's RA is not functioning normally, the TCAS system may fail to issue a collision warning to the pilot and fail to prevent a mid-air collision and a catastrophic loss of life.
Wind shear alerting systems also require accurate RA data. Wind shear alerting has been required for part 121 turbine-powered commercial operations since 1991. ^{35} Initial systems were only reactive, detecting when an aircraft is in a wind shear condition by the unexpected change in altitude, typically using the RA. Wind shear systems have advanced with additional sensors improving performance, and predictive wind shear systems use weather radar to improve wind shear detection. Even in the most sophisticated systems, the pilot uses RA callouts to diagnose the severity of the wind shear and take an appropriate course of action. Erroneous RA altitude during a wind shear condition could result in a failure to provide appropriate thrust to exit the wind shear, increasing the risk of an aircraft accident and catastrophic loss of life.
The aviation community has used RAs to improve pilot situational awareness in a variety of visual operations, and FAA has required it for certain helicopter operations due to the safety benefit it provides. Public Law 112-95 ^{36} requires RAs and Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (HTAWS) for Helicopter Air Ambulance (HAA) operations, which FAA implemented in 2014 ^{37} in 14 CFR 135.160 and 135.605, respectively, and extended to certain powered-lift via § 194.306. ^{38} While many HTAWS primarily rely on terrain maps, barometric altitude, and position information (horizontal and vertical) from GPS, some HTAWS do utilize RA data similar to TAWS in airplanes. RA data is also used for vertical situational awareness in low visibility conditions ( e.g., snow and dust blown up by rotor downwash) and as an input into several procedures and automated systems. On helicopters, automatic and/or manual flight guidance systems rely on accurate RA height data to facilitate low-visibility operations such as Category A and Category B takeoff operations. Search and Rescue and Hover autopilot modes also rely on accurate RA data to function properly. The RA provides a precise measurement of the helicopter's height above the ground, which is critical for safety and performance during low altitude and hover operations. Anomalous RA inputs to these systems may cause the aircraft to be maneuvered in an unexpected or hazardous manner when operating at a low altitude and may not be detectable by the pilot in time to maintain continued safe flight and landing.
Night Vision Goggles (NVG), the common term to describe the use of Night Vision Imaging Systems and Night Vision Enhancement Devices, are used in the operation of airplanes, rotorcraft, and powered-lift. When used properly, NVGs can increase safety, enhance situational awareness, and reduce the pilot workload and stress typically associated with night operations. In 2009, ^{39} FAA updated § 91.205 by adding paragraph (h), which established the instruments and equipment required to be installed, functioning in a normal manner, and approved for use by FAA to conduct NVG operations. Before 2009, RA was included as required equipment under each design approval (type certificate or supplemental type certificate) of an aircraft for NVG operations.
In addition to these common use cases, some aircraft designers have integrated RA systems into other safety systems. This includes tail-strike prevention systems, which push the nose down if the RA indicates a tail-strike is imminent. Some aircraft use RA data to verify the aircraft is on the ground to permit automatic throttle power reduction as well as the safe deployment of thrust reversers and ground spoilers after landing or during an aborted takeoff. RA data that erroneously show the aircraft is above the ground will increase the required stopping distance and increase the risk of overrunning the runway. Similarly, RA data that erroneously show the aircraft is lower than the actual position can trigger auto throttle and landing flare systems, which reduces aircraft speed and increases the risk of landing short of the runway if the pilots do not quickly identify and correct these automatic control systems.
All of these applications must be preserved in the presence of Upper C-band wireless services or restored for those that have been degraded by wireless services in the Lower C-band. Long-term safe coexistence between efficient aviation operations and next-generation wireless services requires RA systems resilient to spectrum interference from signals in neighboring spectrum bands.

C. Current RA Limitations
Historically, out-of-band emissions were not a problem for RA because there were no high-powered signals in neighboring spectrum bands. Current industry standards for RA such as RTCA/DO-155, Minimum Performance Standards Airborne Low-Range Radar Altimeters, ^{40} EUROCAE ED-30, MPS (Minimum Performance Standards) for Airborne Low Range Radio (Radar) Altimeter Equipment, ^{41} and TSO-C87 ^{42} which is aligned with those industry standards, did not address this possibility when they were published in 1974 and 1980, respectively. Before 2020, satellite operators and other low-powered sources used the neighboring frequency bands, and those signals did not interfere with RA systems due to their low power. This changed when the Lower C-band was reallocated to permit higher-powered commercial wireless services.
The voluntary commitments by the wireless service providers have minimized the national economic impact of the AD restrictions and ensured airport access by designating 188 major airports as C-band Mitigation Airports (CMAs) at which Lower C-band licensees are limiting base station power, when necessary, at the request of FAA. These 188 CMAs are the airports that would be most impacted by AD prohibitions on specific operations due to a number of factors, such as passenger traffic, cargo volume, very low-visibility approach procedures, historic weather information, or a combination of these factors. Due to extensive efforts from 2022 to 2024, the aviation industry successfully developed, produced, and installed supplemental (in-line) filters or replaced RA transceivers on thousands of air carrier airplanes with other available units that were more tolerant to interference from transmissions in the Lower C-band, and aligned with the interim voluntary agreements from all 21 FCC license holders. However, this work by the aviation industry to address the unsafe conditions and quickly upgrade within the limits of existing RA system capabilities did not provide sufficient time to develop more robust solutions that would enable the full range of RA applications or address the potential for additional spectrum expansion.
FAA permitted operators of approximately 26,500 aircraft to choose to accept operational restrictions instead of upgrading their systems. FAA analysis showed that there was not an immediate need to mandate RA replacement for non-part 121 operators when the highest risk operations remained prohibited by the ADs and the cumulative risk of other hazards was found acceptable in the short-term. However, the safety enhancements for these aircraft have been compromised, such as the potential for erroneous alerts or no alerts from TCAS and TAWS, due to the risk of interference causing incorrect RA altitude data. These cumulative risks must be resolved to support long-term safe coexistence.
The FAA requested the RA equipment manufacturers share available data concerning the performance of their equipment to interfering signals in the Upper C-band. All five existing manufacturers provided proprietary data for their Lower C-band tolerant equipment ( e.g., those approved for compliance with AD 2023-10-02). ^{43} The data indicate that no existing civil equipment can tolerate wireless services aligned with FCC's Lower C-band technical rules in the 100 MHz (or more) of the spectrum to be auctioned above 3.98 GHz. Allocating even 20 MHz of additional spectrum to rural or non-rural wireless services would be incompatible with the current Lower C-band tolerant RAs and would require more than 45% of Lower C-band tolerant RAs to be modified or replaced. Table 2 summarizes the achievable performance of the existing Lower C-band tolerant RAs, broken down by specific frequency ranges within the Upper C-band. The power flux-density indicates the minimum interference tolerance at 500 feet AGL and below, measured as a root mean square (RMS) in decibel-watts per square meter per MHz (dBW/m ^2 /MHz).
Table 2—Frequency Ranges Within the Upper C-Band
Frequency range (MHz) | Power flux-density, RMS (dBW/m ^2 /MHz), 0-500 feet HAGL
3980 < f < 4100 | −40
4100 ≤ f < 4200 | −67
| 4200 to 4400 | −105
There are also thousands of RA systems that have not been modified to be tolerant to Lower C-band wireless services under the current voluntary agreement and are more susceptible to interference than shown in Table 2.

D. Next Generation RA Capability
FAA is proposing an ITM that reflects the best achievable interference rejection using current technology and without compromising RA system performance. This proposal has been informed by briefings from existing RA suppliers and by various industry forums that have discussed performance collectively. The wireless and aviation industries have also been engaged in ongoing discussions about how to promote safe coexistence between expanded wireless services in the Upper C-band and RA systems. ^{44}
The most substantive industry discussions concerning RA system performance have taken place in the RTCA and EUROCAE joint committee, which has been developing an industry consensus standard for next-generation RA systems since 2019. These next-generation RA systems will be responsible spectrum users, with an up-to-date design to provide the best currently achievable performance to tolerate and reject potential interference. RTCA SC-239 was established in 2019 and tasked with revising RTCA/DO-155. RTCA SC-239 is working on these MOPS jointly with EUROCAE WG-119, which will also be releasing an update to ED-30. The joint committee has completed a draft standard that is undergoing validation, which involves testing and analysis with prototype new designs to ensure that the requirements are both achievable and sufficient to meet the industry's needs. RTCA plans to publish a final new standard in March 2027. FAA has participated in the RTCA/EUROCAE industry standard development.
FAA has considered all available information from individual manufacturers and the various working groups to develop the ITM proposed in this NPRM. FAA plans to issue a TSO that references the final industry standard and will ensure the TSO aligns with this proposed rule, identifying differences from the final industry standard if necessary. The TSO will enable companies to use equipment qualified to the ITM and industry standard as a means of compliance with this regulation. FAA is not proposing changes to the intended function or performance requirements of RA systems, which may also include requirements derived by the aircraft design approval holder for each RA application. The proposed rule effectively defines an interference environment within which the intended RA system functions and performance are achieved.
The interference tolerance requirement would apply to the entire RA system, comprised of the RA antenna(s), cables, and transceiver. When defining interference tolerance close to the edge of the RA band, the frequency selectivity of the antenna does not have an appreciable effect due to other design constraints, such as the group delay and the lack of available space for a separate radio frequency (RF) filter. The achievable ITM in the near-band is driven by the transceiver performance requirements. While it would be possible to require additional interference rejection due to the RA antenna's ability to reject signals far from the desired RA band, doing so would have a significant cost and schedule effect because it would require the requalification, and potentially replacement, of all RA antennas. The proposed ITM does not require this additional interference rejection, as it would not have a benefit in the potential use of the adjacent band for next-generation wireless services. As a result, operators can use RA transceivers that meet the ITM without requalification of an existing RA antenna. The ITM is specified as a PFD regardless of the angle of arrival to the RA antenna, so the maximum RA antenna gain must be used when showing compliance. The ITM is specified for a single polarization because the RA antennas are linearly polarized and the orientation of the polarization of an interference source and that of the RA antenna cannot be controlled.
FAA has developed additional guidance to address this and other aircraft-level qualification issues in the proposed AC 20-199 Advisory Circular (AC) for Installation of an Airborne Low-Range Radio Altimeter System. ^{45} FAA will solicit comments on the AC and update it based on those comments and any changes to the final rule.

E. Proposed Regulation and Retrofit Requirements
FAA is proposing new regulations that would require all RAs to meet specific minimum performance requirements for all aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 91 that are equipped with RAs. FAA is proposing two different compliance dates based on the safety risks associated with the different types of aircraft operations. Aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 121, and aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 129 with 30 or more seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds, would be required to meet the minimum RA performance requirements by an initial RA performance date that would be specified in the final rule. FAA proposes to provide an additional two years for compliance for all other operations of aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia and equipped with RAs.
The initial RA performance deadline is proposed to coincide with FCC's date authorizing the initiation of new wireless services in the Upper C-band. FAA expects this initial RA performance deadline to be sometime between 2029 and 2032. As addressed in section E.2, FAA is soliciting public comments on the proposed compliance dates. In the final rule, FAA would prescribe specific RA performance deadlines, as informed by public comments.
To implement the new minimum performance requirements, FAA is proposing to add § 91.220 to define the minimum RA interference tolerance necessary to address next-generation wireless in the Upper C-band aligned with Lower C-band technical rules, subject to resolving the spurious emissions from wireless base stations described in section IV.E.5. FAA also proposes new sections in parts 121 and 129 to implement the initial RA performance deadline. Specifically, § 121.326 would require all aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 121, if equipped with an RA system, to meet the RA system minimum performance requirements stated in § 91.220(b) by the initial RA performance deadline. Section 129.16(a) would require all aircraft with 30 or more seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds operating under 14 CFR part 129, if equipped with an RA system, to meet the RA system performance requirements in § 91.220(b) by the initial RA performance deadline. Proposed § 91.220(a) would impose the same RA system performance requirement by the final RA performance deadline (two years after the initial compliance deadline) for all other aircraft equipped with RA operating under 14 CFR part 91, including GA, rotorcraft, other commercial aircraft, and public aircraft. Proposed § 129.16(b) would also impose the final RA performance deadline for all other aircraft equipped with RA operating under part 129.
FAA is proposing in § 91.220(b) to specify the minimum RA interference tolerance necessary to address wireless services in both the Lower and Upper C-band as well as a broader range of frequencies surrounding the RA band. Table 3 shows the proposed minimum RA system interference tolerance requirement applicable to different frequency ranges. The RA system would be required to operate at an altitude of 0-500 feet above ground level in this proposed interference environment. The interference environment is broken down by specific frequency ranges above, in, and below the RA band as shown in Table 3. The interference environment is specified as a PFD at the surface of the aircraft antenna, measured as RMS in dBW/m ^2 /MHz, so the RA system compliance includes the maximum directional gain of a linearly-polarized RA antenna. Figure 1 illustrates the interference environment defined in Table 3.
Table 3—Proposed Minimum Requirement for RA System Interference Tolerance
Frequency range (MHz) | Power flux density, single polarization, RMS (dBW/m ^2 /MHz)
3000 ≤ f < 4000 | 9.5
4000 ≤ f < 4100 | 9.5
4100 ≤ f < 4150 | 9.5
4150 ≤ f < 4160 | 6.5
4160 ≤ f < 4180 | −1
4180 ≤ f < 4190 | −17
4190 ≤ f < 4200 | −34
4200 ≤ f ≤ 4400 | −82
4400 < f ≤ 4410 | −33
4410 < f ≤ 4430 | −21
4430 < f ≤ 4440 | −8
4440 < f ≤ 4450 | −1
4450 < f ≤ 4460 | 6.5
4460 < f ≤ 4500 | 9.5
4500 < f ≤ 4600 | 9.5
4600 < f ≤ 5600 | 9.5

Figure 1: Proposed Minimum RA System Interference Tolerance
Table 4 shows the proposed CFR section additions to attain this compliance schedule.
Table 4—Regulatory Text Changes
CFR addition | Section text
§ 91.220 Radio Altimeter Systems | (a) After [two years after the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of paragraph (b).
| (b) The radio altimeter system must operate at an altitude of 0-500 feet above ground level in the interference environment defined in Table 1.
§ 121.326 Radio Altimeter Systems | After [the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.
§ 129.16 Radio Altimeter Systems | (a) After [the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.
| (b) After [two years after the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.
FAA considered potential changes to the current ADs that address interference with RA systems and found that no further regulatory action regarding those ADs needs to be taken at this time. The ADs address unsafe conditions with wireless services in the Lower C-band, and those conditions will continue until aircraft comply with the new performance requirements. FAA has also granted several exemptions providing relief from addressing the 14 CFR 91.205(h)(7) requirement for RA to support NVG operations, which will continue to be necessary until all aircraft comply with the new performance requirements. The regulations proposed in this rule would address these issues and resolve all known interference threats to RAs after the proposed final deadline.

1. Scope—Aircraft Affected
RA systems are used in a variety of aircraft as described previously. To maintain the safety advantages provided by reliable, accurate RA data, FAA proposes to require that all aircraft equipped with RA must be equipped with an RA system that can operate in the future interference environment. Many aircraft rely on accurate RA data to support safety systems that are required by other regulations, and RA systems must function properly to provide the safety benefits that justify these equipment requirements.
There are also civil aircraft that have voluntarily been equipped with an RA for safety and operational reasons. The intended function of that equipment is to provide accurate altitude data, and FAA proposes to preserve that capability in the future operating environment. For these aircraft, there is a cost increase from the existing RA equipment to interference-tolerant RA equipment. Some avionics companies have proposed a class of equipment that would stop functioning by design when exposed to adjacent band interference. Their proposal would ensure the integrity of the RA output while exposed to the full RFI levels specified in this proposed rule by ensuring that the RA stops functioning rather than reporting an erroneous altitude. However, this would prevent the RA from enhancing safety in those environments and complicate the aircraft integration. The proposed regulation would require all GA aircraft with an RA to upgrade their equipment to be capable of operating in the interference environment specified in this proposed rule. FAA recognizes that the future voluntary adoption of RA may be negatively impacted by the increased costs of a compliant RA.
FAA proposes that these regulations apply to public aircraft operations, including military aircraft that are equipped with RA when operating in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia. The RA is important equipment for public aircraft operations for the same reasons as civil aircraft (as discussed in sections E.3 and E.4), and its functionality must be assured. Military aircraft have unique use-cases for their RA systems, but the minimum safe distance described below is expected to be sufficient for their operations. Many military aircraft use RA technology that is different than the civil fleet and is more robust in the presence of interference.
The proposed rule would not address operations that are not conducted under 14 CFR part 91 and therefore would not apply to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operating under part 107, the proposed part 108, ^{46} or limited recreational operations under 49 U.S.C. 44809. ^{47} RA systems are not currently integrated into these aircraft, and integrating them is challenging due to size restrictions. Any future use of RAs by UAS should consider the RF environment of their operation, and the performance requirements for such equipment should be handled through the appropriate aircraft or operational qualification process.
FCC is proposing to preserve the status quo regarding its current licenses outside of the contiguous United States, which would be permitted to continue in the entire 3.7-4.2 GHz band. ^{48} FCC notes that reallocating spectrum only within the contiguous U.S. would ensure the ongoing provision of C-band services necessary to protect life and property outside the contiguous U.S.—including telehealth, E911, and education services—for which C-band service may be the only option available, such as in remote areas of Alaska. Therefore, FAA is proposing that the RA performance requirement would not apply to operations in the airspace over the State of Alaska, the State of Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. territories and possessions, including territorial waters. Aircraft that are only operated in the airspace where this rule does not apply would not need to equip with RA systems that meet the proposed performance requirements. FAA specifically requests comments on the suitability of applying the proposed rule only in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia.
The proposed requirements would not extend into the airspace overlying the waters between 3 and 12 nautical miles (nm) from the coast of the U.S, and therefore does not propose a revision to § 91.1(b). The proposed requirements would be applicable to aircraft operating in that offshore airspace if they arrive, depart, or otherwise operate in the airspace within 3 nm of the coast of the 48 contiguous United States as described in this proposed rule. FAA seeks comments about the need to require specific RA performance, as proposed, in additional offshore waters.

2. Schedule—Availability of Next Generation RA
FAA is proposing this rule to provide a permanent resolution for next-generation wireless services in the Lower and Upper C-band, as well as a broader range of frequencies surrounding the RA band. The objective is to maintain aviation safety in the NAS and provide high confidence that all aircraft equipped with RA operating under 14 CFR part 91 will be compatible with expanded next-generation wireless services in the Upper C-band. While FAA anticipates the initial RA performance deadline will be between 2029 and 2032, FAA does not have sufficient data to determine a specific date at this time. FAA will be considering a variety of factors to help balance the urgency as a result of expanding wireless services in the Upper C-band with the development of the next generation RA systems with acceptable schedule risk. FAA also asks for public comments in consideration of the factors discussed in this section. RA performance deadlines will be prescribed in the final rule as informed by public comments. We also seek comment on how the timing of the aviation industry's future implementation efforts should be aligned with FCC's statutory responsibility to complete an auction by July, 2027.
The schedule to accomplish the retrofit is driven by several activities and different stakeholders, so that no single stakeholder can provide a high-confidence schedule for the retrofit. Factors to consider in the compliance schedule include:
Requirement determination and product initiation: This proposed rule would require new transceivers and companies would have to make the decision to invest in detailed engineering and qualification for a new product. New products are designed to meet specific requirements, and without an agreement on the performance requirements for the next-generation product, any investment is at risk that the product will not be found acceptable. By issuing this NPRM, FAA is proposing RA performance requirements that will be necessary for safe coexistence between aviation operations and next-generation wireless services. Aircraft-specific integration requirements are defined by each aircraft's original equipment manufacturer (OEM). Completion of the RTCA/EUROCAE industry standard may also be a factor in establishing international industry consensus.
Product development and certification: Companies intending to provide next-generation RA systems would have to develop new products to meet the ITM and market requirements. The typical product development schedule for flight-critical avionics is two to four years. To facilitate the demonstration of compliance with the proposed rule and to streamline equipment certification, FAA plans to recognize the industry standard with a new TSO for next-generation RA transceivers and a separate TSO for RA antennas. FAA would ensure that the TSOs conform to the ITM requirements in the final rule, identifying differences from the final industry standard if necessary. A TSO provides a means for obtaining FAA design and production approval based on the applicant's statement of compliance with the TSO. FAA plans to issue the TSOs immediately after the final RTCA MOPS.
Aircraft integration and compliance: As described previously, the RA is integrated into a variety of other aircraft systems. An applicant for an amended type certificate or supplemental type certificate would be required to demonstrate that any modification to the aircraft met FAA's airworthiness regulations, either as an amendment to the type certificate or as a supplemental type certificate. The extent of the engineering and associated qualification of the integrated system can vary significantly depending on the aircraft integration, which has a commensurate impact on the schedule to complete this work. A significant factor for the integration of RA systems is the potential re-use of existing RA antennas. When qualifying the RA system, the design approval holder would be required to consider the antenna and cable performance. Since all existing aircraft and associated RA antennas were qualified without any specific requirements to withstand interference from adjacent bands, there is no certification data on antenna performance at those adjacent frequencies. Some companies have tested the performance of in-service antennas to provide an indication of their performance, but that data is not sufficient to address product variability or lifecycle effects. Given this and the considerations addressed in the next generation RA description in section IV.D., FAA proposes an interference mask that, if met only by the transceiver adjacent band rejection, would not require the in-service antennas to be re-evaluated or re-qualified. FAA assumes that aircraft integration can largely be accomplished in parallel with the equipment compliance demonstration. Some additional time is required to allow for testing of the integrated system, including the certified transceiver (and antenna if applicable).
Equipment availability: RA equipment is manufactured under an FAA-approved quality control system to ensure that every article conforms with the approved design. The production rate for the equipment varies by manufacturer and equipment. Changes in the production rate require investment by the company, and planning for a surge in production that is followed by a significant drop in production (when a retrofit is complete) may increase costs. Replacement RAs must be manufactured for the entire fleet of aircraft that are replacing their equipment, so the size of the retrofit is also a factor in the time needed to complete the fleet retrofit. FAA assumes that the production rate can increase to equal the installation rate within months of the equipment being approved and requests public comment on this assumption.
Aircraft alteration: The final step in accomplishing the retrofit is to install the new equipment in aircraft. Replacing an RA transceiver can typically be accomplished as part of overnight maintenance, provided mounting brackets, connectors, and other physical characteristics are compatible. Replacing an antenna and cables can take several days to accomplish and would be scheduled to align with other heavy maintenance activities when the aircraft would otherwise be out of service (commonly referred to as a C-check). This type of maintenance typically occurs every two years for transport category aircraft. By providing a path to avoid the need for a replacement antenna if the transceiver demonstrates the required performance, FAA assumes that it will not be necessary to align the installation with heavy maintenance. The general aviation fleet may require additional time to complete the retrofit across the entire fleet due to the lack of centralized coordination of the modification of aircraft. FAA proposes an additional two years to demonstrate compliance with the proposed rule to allow for the challenges in coordinating the general aviation retrofit.
Financing and Incentive Considerations: FAA notes that FCC is seeking comments on ways in which RA retrofits can be incentivized and accelerated as part of the overall Upper C-band repurposing and transition process. ^{49} That includes specific proposals and mechanisms to facilitate RA retrofits from a financial perspective. In order to inform the deadlines for this proposed rule, FAA is seeking comments on the schedule impacts to the proposed RA system performance requirements resulting from such incentives.
In their terms of reference, RTCA SC-239 notes that the new MOPS “is envisioned to be referenced by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other civil aviation authorities (CAAs) as appropriate in certification guidance material, including TSOs or other national documents.” FAA recognizes that adoption by other CAAs, as intended, is likely to increase worldwide demand for new RA systems that meet these performance requirements. This increased demand could result in competition for resources to support the retrofit for civil and military aircraft. FAA specifically requests comments about the potential impact on schedule and cost due to early adoption by operators who do not regularly fly to the U.S.
The aviation community has addressed a number of large-scale equipment mandates that provide additional experience-based insight into the schedule. For comparison, Table 5 shows the timeline for other broad equipage mandates.
Table 5—Equipment Mandate Timelines
Equipment mandate | Acronym | Compliance time | Related information
Ground Proximity Warning System (14 CFR 121) (12/18/1974) | GPWS | 1 year (12/1/1975) | This equipment was subsequently upgraded to TAWS (add functionality).
Terrain Awareness and Warning System (14 CFR 121) (3/29/2000) | TAWS | 5 years (3/29/2005) | Airplanes manufactured two or more years after the final rule's publication required TAWS be installed at time of delivery.
Helicopter TAWS for Helicopter Air Ambulance (2/21/2014) | HTAWS (HAA) | 3 years (4/24/2017) |
| Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (1/10/1989) | TCAS I >30 seats TCAS I 1-30 seats | 3 years (12/30/1991) 7 years (2/9/95; 12/31/95) | Extended due to equipment delays. Initially 6 years.
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (5/28/2010) | ADS-B Out | 10 years (1/1/2020) | Some aircraft are accommodated without equipage
These schedule drivers indicate that the initial RA performance deadline is achievable within 3 to 6 years of the final rule, or between 2029 and 2032, depending on a variety of factors as discussed previously. FAA intends to select compliance dates that reflect the urgency of expanding next-generation wireless services, recognizing any real constraints on the rapidity with which the retrofits can occur. FAA is requesting comments from the aviation stakeholders to inform the deadlines for inclusion in the final rule. When providing comments, please consider the following questions:
Transceiver manufacturers: What is the status of your product development? When do you project a next-generation RA transceiver to be certified, and how long after certification will it take to ramp up production? What factors could accelerate your schedule? What factors could delay your schedule, and what affects those factors?
OEMs: What is the status of incorporating next-generation RA systems into your aircraft designs? How long after transceiver certification do you require to complete an amended type certificate, and why? Are there aircraft-specific integration requirements that may require a replacement antenna? What factors could accelerate your schedule? What factors could delay your schedule, and what affects those factors?
Air carriers and other operators: After a design approval is completed for the aircraft, how long do you require to modify your fleet? What factors could accelerate your schedule? What factors could delay your schedule, and what affects those factors?
FAA analysis of current information indicates that these schedule risks will be resolved as additional information is finalized before the final rule is issued. FAA requests comments about the proposed timeline to meet RA performance requirements, from the perspective of RA transceiver and antenna suppliers, aircraft manufacturers, and operators. The most valuable comments to help inform final regulations are data-driven comments that detail capabilities, costs, benefits, timeline impacts, and other specific information directly relevant to the proposed regulations.

3. Part 121 Air Carriers and Large Part 129 Aircraft
FAA proposes that aircraft equipped with RA operating under part 121 and aircraft operating for foreign air carriers with 30 or more seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds under part 129 must retrofit their RAs by the initial RA performance deadline. This compliance deadline is proposed to align with FCC's date authorizing wireless services in the Upper C-band. The initial RA performance deadline would be specified in the final rule and is anticipated to be between 2029 and 2032. These operations are the most critical to the national economy and have the highest expected level of safety, making them a priority. By completing these retrofits, the U.S. would preserve safe aviation operations while expanding the use of next-generation wireless services in the adjacent band as addressed in section E.5. Other actions must be taken to ensure unsafe conditions do not arise between the sunset of the existing Lower C-band FAA-wireless voluntary agreement and the initial RA performance deadline; this is addressed in section G.
ICAO is planning updates to Annex 10 Volume V intended to help protect RAs from potentially harmful in-band and adjacent band interference caused by non-aeronautical systems operating in adjacent frequency bands. FAA seeks comment on the proposed compliance deadline for part 129 operators, in light of these potential updates to Annex 10.
FAA estimates that there are 8,014 aircraft operating under part 121, though some of those aircraft are temporarily or permanently inactive. With specific fleets requiring 1 to 3 RA per aircraft, FAA anticipates part 121 air carriers would need approximately 17,033 new RAs to comply with this proposed rule. While part 129 foreign air carriers operate a very large number of aircraft, not all of those aircraft fly in U.S. airspace on a regular basis. There are approximately 4,519 large aircraft with 30 or more seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds operating under 14 CFR part 129 that fly to the U.S., ^{50} which would result in approximately 10,341 new RA systems needed for part 129 foreign air carriers.
FAA recognizes that it may be more costly and complex to upgrade RAs in older aircraft models due to reduced support from manufacturers for out-of-production units and potential compatibility issues with older integrated systems, impacting the design, development, certification, and cost of replacement RA systems. Operators of those airplanes will need to decide whether to upgrade to RA systems that meet the proposed performance requirements or retire those airplanes from contiguous U.S. operations. FAA specifically requests comments about implementation challenges for older RAs and older aircraft and the associated costs of retrofit or aircraft retirement for older aircraft.

4. All Other Aircraft
FAA proposes an additional two years after the initial RA performance deadline for all other aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 91 including GA, rotorcraft, other commercial aircraft, and public aircraft. Some of these operators currently have AD-mandated restrictions on their operations dependent on accurate RA data due to the Lower C-band wireless services, and many of these operators are accepting the risks associated with localized interference that could disrupt TAWS, TCAS, and other RA applications. Those restrictions must continue until a retrofit is accomplished, which would address both the Lower and Upper C-band compatibility. Section H discusses the relationship between the proposed rule, current ADs, and other FAA policy.
FAA recognizes that there are potential challenges with the proposed deadlines due to the need to complete standards, develop prototypes, certify new RAs for multiple aircraft fleets, and install new RAs without significantly disrupting revenue service. With the final RA performance deadline two years after the initial RA performance deadline, FAA seeks to reduce stress on supply chains, manufacturing, and installation. This additional time accounts for unique market factors in general aviation, including the seasonality of aircraft maintenance in Alaska for those Alaska-based operators who also fly into the contiguous United States. FAA estimates that approximately 31,821 new or upgraded RA systems will be required to address helicopters, business aviation, GA, and other aircraft equipped with RAs that are not subject to the initial RA performance deadline.
FAA also recognizes that it may be more costly and complex to upgrade RAs in older aircraft models. Older RA models may be more difficult to replace due to reduced support from manufacturers for out-of-production units and potential compatibility issues with older integrated systems, impacting the design, development, certification, and cost of replacement RA systems. Operators of those airplanes will need to decide whether to upgrade to RA systems that meet the proposed performance requirements, remove the RA system altogether, or retire those airplanes from contiguous U.S. operations. FAA specifically requests comments about implementation challenges for older RA and older aircraft and the associated costs of retrofit or aircraft retirement for older aircraft.

5. Safety Analysis of the Proposed Minimum Performance Requirements
The purpose of this proposed regulation is to achieve the full functionality of RAs in the presence of next-generation wireless services in the adjacent C-Band. This section summarizes FAA's methodology to ensure the safe operation of RAs and the equipment that relies on accurate RA data. Based on this analysis, RA systems compliant with the proposed rule can safely operate with more than 100 MHz for next-generation wireless services in the adjacent band (up to 4160 MHz) aligned with Lower C-band technical rules, provided emissions limits into the RA band are addressed as discussed below. This safety analysis assumes that there are no siting constraints on the wireless base stations.
To operate reliably, the RA system must be demonstrated for the expected operating environment, including interference levels that may be encountered in flight. The interference environment that will be encountered after the initial RA performance deadline has not yet been determined, so FAA is not able to evaluate a specific interference proposal. In lieu of that, FAA has applied FCC's baseline proposition that the existing 3.7 GHz Service rules would apply to new services in the Upper C-band. FAA has found that the proposed ITM is fully compatible with the power levels of rural next-generation wireless services ( e.g., 65 dBm/MHz Effective Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP)) up to 4160 MHz. FAA considered minimum separation distance (MSD) and safety margins, as discussed in this section, to determine the allowable interference as depicted in the following formula:
PFD (in dBW/m ^2 /MHz) = EIRP (per polarization, in dBm/MHz)−30−10*log10(4*pi)−20*log10(MSD (in meters)) + SAFETY MARGIN
As long as the calculated PFD at a given frequency is less than or equal to the ITM, the RA system will perform safely. Therefore, the ITM levels ≥+6.5 dBW/m ^2 /MHz up to 4160 MHz can tolerate up to 65 dBm/MHz total EIRP for dual-polarization base stations as shown in Table 6. The 65 dBm/MHz applies to the aggregate power of all antenna elements in any given sector of a base station, consistent with existing FCC rules in the Lower C-band.
The rationale for the parameters used in Table 6 are discussed below. FAA considered MSD and 6 decibel (dB) safety margins to set these parameters. The RA antenna gain is not shown, as the maximum RA antenna gain is used when showing compliance to the ITM.
Table 6—Adjacent Band Compatibility Analysis
Parameter | Value
ITM (4150-4160 MHz) | +6.5 dBW/m ^2 /MHz.
Minimum Separation Distance (MSD) (loss) | 35 ft. (−31.6 dB).
Safety margin | 6 dB.
Safe level of wireless emission (EIRP) | 62 dBm/MHz.
Safe level of wireless emission (dual-pol EIRP) | 65 dBm/MHz.
Due to the wide range of applications for the RA system and the variety of aircraft equipped with RAs, FAA proposes that the RA must function reliably at 35 feet MSD from any wireless base station when the aircraft is 500 feet AGL or lower. MSD is defined as a sphere with a 35-foot radius, originating at the wireless base station antenna phase center, for an aircraft at 500 feet AGL and lower. The smallest transport category airplanes certificated under part 25 have wingspans greater than 35 feet (and half-wingspans of approximately 35 feet), and most helicopters required to be equipped with RA have an overall length of 35 feet or more. The proposed MSD supports the continued safe function of the RA and integrated safety systems in all normal, off-nominal, and emergency operations unless the aircraft is so close to a wireless base station or the structure where it is mounted that the catastrophic risk of collision is greater than the risk of interference.
Thirty-five feet of vertical clearance is less than the closest expected distance during normal and off-nominal operation for aircraft equipped with RA systems. Aircraft have significantly greater separation from obstacles during normal operations due to the minimum safe altitude requirements in § 91.119, obstacle clearance criteria for instrument procedures and routes, and requirements for obstacle-free areas surrounding runways, including in the approach and departure area to protect low altitude operations and ensure approach light systems are not obscured. FAA heliport criteria ^{51} also define obstacle-free areas based on the largest helicopter supported and greater than 35 feet for the final approach and takeoff area, with an additional obstacle buffer in the safety area and under the recommended approach and departure paths. When there is sufficient visibility, pilots see and avoid obstacles to ensure safe minimum separation. Below 500 feet AGL, helicopters must be operated without hazard to persons or property on the surface, and helicopter operations away from airports or heliports must be performed with sufficient flight visibility to ensure safe separation from antenna structures, aligned with the MSD assumptions. In normal instrument approach operations and at a 200-foot AGL decision height, the airplane must descend almost twice as much as a full-scale low indication on the glide slope to get within 35 feet vertically of the obstacle clearance surface.
The MSD also considered off-nominal operations and emergency operations. One engine inoperative obstacle clearance requirements in § § 121.189, 135.379, and 135.398 require 35 feet of vertical clearance. The most demanding alerting function is the ground proximity warning of TAWS, which must properly analyze and alert pilots of hazards as low as 30 feet AGL. The 35-foot MSD provides assurance that GPWS will operate in all but the most severe terrain scenarios. Predictive windshear alerting systems must also be able to function properly at a very low altitude due to the potentially catastrophic risks of microbursts, downdrafts, and similar wind shifts that cause the aircraft to lose altitude and approach the bottom of the normal approach obstacle clearance surface (OCS). The RA must function properly, even when very close to a wireless base station, to ensure that the RA does not report an erroneous low altitude, which could cause TCAS to fail to provide resolution advisory guidance if a nearby aircraft is on a collision course.
RA performance requirements for operations above 500 feet AGL are not specifically addressed in the proposed regulations. When an aircraft is above 500 feet AGL, interference that prevents the RA system from operating normally is less likely, and the consequence is also reduced as there is more time to recover after interference. Stricter obstacle clearance rules apply for all operations above 500 feet AGL. Minimum safe altitude requirements in § 91.119 define clearance from terrain and obstacles, such as the requirement to be at an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft when operating over congested areas; the requirement to be at an altitude of 500 feet above the surface when operating over other than congested areas; and the requirement to be no closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure when operating over water or sparsely populated areas. Under instrument flight rules, separation from obstacles increases at higher altitudes due to increases in required obstacle clearance for routes at higher altitudes and greater separation distances provided by sloping OCS when the aircraft is further from the runway and at a higher altitude. Given the larger MSD in operation, the RA system is expected to operate normally above 500 feet AGL as the amount of interference received by the RA antenna decreases with the increasing path loss.
For safety applications, the aviation community applies a minimum 6 dB safety margin above the expected interference environment to account for unknown issues that could impact the safe operation of the RA. The equipment is required to operate normally when the actual interference level is 6 dB above the expected interference level. For spectrum compatibility, this accounts for uncertainties in the design and implementation of adjacent-band RF base stations, which do not have to meet aviation safety standards. The safety margin also addresses the risk from unforeseen factors. This is consistent with ICAO recommendations in ICAO Doc 9718, the Handbook on Radio Frequency Spectrum Requirements for Civil Aviation, which indicates that a safety margin of 6-10 dB is to be applied for aeronautical safety systems.
FAA also evaluated the safe compatibility with respect to interference into the RA band. Emissions into the RA band are a result of base station out-of-band spurious emissions. The RA system must operate with the interference from all emissions sources into the RA band, including, but not limited to, the interference from Lower and Upper C-band wireless service. The total aggregate in-band interference depends on the number and the relative position of all other interference sources to the RA system antenna. To simplify that analysis, FAA considered the out-of-band emissions from a dominant source. A dominant source would have the same MSD as the adjacent band case (35 feet), for the reasons described previously above. Wireless base stations may be housed on the same antenna structure operating at different frequencies. An upper limit of three base stations is assumed, with the effective aggregate interference of all other base stations and mobile units no greater than that of a single base station at the MSD. This limiting case has an aggregate interference that is 6 dB higher than a single base station. Table 7 summarizes the parameters that are used to determine in-band compatibility.
PFD (in dBW/m ^2 /MHz) = EIRP (per polarization, in dBm/MHz)−30−10*log10(4*pi)−20*log10(MSD (in meters)) + SAFETY MARGIN + AGGREGATION
Table 7—In-Band Compatibility Analysis
Parameter | Value
ITM (In-Band tolerance) | −82 dBW/m ^2 /MHz.
Minimum Separation Distance (MSD) (loss) | 35 ft. (−31.6 dB).
Safety margin | 6 dB.
Emitter Aggregation | 6 dB.
Safe level of wireless emission into RA band (EIRP per polarization) | −33dBm/MHz.
Safe level of wireless emission into RA band (EIRP for dual polarization) | −30 dBm/MHz.
The RA system can operate safely if the aggregate in-band interference from external sources is less than the in-band interference limit of −82 dBW/m ^2 /MHz. Therefore, the RA system can operate safely with an EIRP from each base station of −33 dBm/MHz per polarization (or −30 dBm/MHz for equal dual-polarized signals). When FAA completed the safety analysis for the Lower C-band, FAA accepted maximum antenna coupling between the RA antenna and the wireless base station of 10 to 12 dBi. The coupling is the sum of the RA antenna gain and the base station gain. Under this proposal, the RA antenna gain is accounted for within the ITM requirement. With the base station tuned to a closer frequency to the edge of the 4.2-4.4 GHz band, FAA is seeking comment on base station antenna gain characteristics between 4.2 and 4.4 GHz so FAA can finalize the safety analysis. As a point of comparison, the voluntary commitment for the Lower C-Band specifies a maximum of −48 dBm/MHz conducted emissions in the 4.2-4.4 GHz band, which would be safe with up to 18 dBi of base station gain.
FAA is also seeking comments on the overall safety analysis presented in this section. The factors in the safety link analysis have many variables. Due to the potentially catastrophic severity of interference, FAA has adopted values that reflect a very low likelihood of occurrence. The typical interference will be considerably less. For example, the base station spot-beam is frequently pointed away from the aircraft when the aircraft is overhead, and the RA antenna would typically have low gain towards the base station when the aircraft is adjacent to a wireless base station. Multipath can increase or decrease the received signal strength, though not typically within the maximum antenna spot beam. While the duty cycle of the base station is limited based on the next-generation wireless technology, FAA seeks to adopt an RA system requirement regardless of the wireless service technology to be used. The motion of the aircraft, as compared to a fixed wireless base station, can also affect the tolerable interference in the integrated aircraft systems. When considering the in-band interference, the spurious emissions would typically be decorrelated across multiple wireless base stations and not add constructively. Finally, the aggregate interference would typically be the sum of one or two collocated base stations, a large number of mobile units, and a few other base stations at different distances. FAA's analysis intentionally provides a very high assurance that interference will not occur, thus averting a catastrophic outcome. Comments on these factors should address the likelihood of the various conditions, so FAA can ensure that the likelihood of interference that could lead to a catastrophic outcome is sufficiently low.

F. Safety Analysis for Wireless Access Prior to the Initial RA Performance Deadline
Existing RA systems cannot accommodate wireless signals above 3.98 GHz aligned with Lower C-band technical rules without constraints on wireless base station location and power levels. While FAA and wireless service providers have agreed to similar constraints in the short term for the Lower C-band, FAA does not plan to expand that analysis to the Upper C-band. Instead, FAA proposes to require the RA retrofit to be completed in the most critical aircraft by the time FCC authorizes new wireless services in the Upper C-band. The safety analysis presented previously provides a template for MSD from next-generation wireless services in the 3.98-4.2 GHz band, accounting for the more sensitive RA performance described in section C, Current RA Limitations.

G. Lower C-Band Mitigations
The suitability of a new RA cannot be assured without also addressing the potential for interference from wireless base stations in the Lower C-band (3.7-3.98 GHz). The twenty-one wireless licensees have filed a voluntary commitment with FCC to ensure their signals do not cause an unsafe condition, as determined by FAA, and that the most critical aircraft operations for commerce can continue without disruption. ^{52} The voluntary commitment runs through January 2028, unless extended or reduced by mutual agreement. FAA intends to seek an extension of the terms of the voluntary commitment until the initial RA performance deadline.
In the end state, after the RA retrofit proposed by this rule is complete, the updated RA systems will operate safely, assuming the final Lower and Upper C-band wireless transmissions into the RA band are harmonized.

H. Relationship to Airworthiness Directives and Other FAA Policy
There are a number of ADs that address the unsafe conditions posed by interference from the Lower C-band wireless services, as discussed previously in section III. The RA system performance requirements proposed by this rule would provide sufficient tolerance to Lower C-band wireless services to prevent the unsafe conditions identified and addressed in the current ADs, subject to resolving the spurious emissions issue described in section IV.E.5.
Under the wireless voluntary agreement, the wireless signals near 188 airports are limited to lower levels to allow certain aircraft to conduct unrestricted operations. Those aircraft were modified in 2022-2024 with RA systems that are tolerant to the Lower C-band wireless signals. The next generation RA systems proposed in § 91.220 would ensure continued unrestricted operations after the initial RA compliance deadline without any airport-specific wireless power limitations. After that date, if necessary, FAA would supersede the current ADs to impose operating limitations on the use of RAs that do not meet the proposed performance requirements until such time as the RA system is replaced. The superseding ADs would address operators who have upgraded to a Lower C-band interference-tolerant RA, but do not upgrade to an RA system compliant with the proposed rule prior to the initial compliance date.
FAA plans to recognize an aircraft's compliance with the proposed 14 CFR 91.220(b) as an AMOC with all existing ADs and any superseded ADs that may be necessary, to permit operation without limitations for those aircraft once they are equipped. FAA also plans to authorize a foreign operator to operate without additional limitations in the U.S. if the aircraft complies with this retrofit requirement.
Most airplanes operating under part 121 and large airplanes operating under part 129 are equipped with RA systems that comply with FAA policy statement PS-AIR-600-39-01, ^{53} which provides guidance for operators and manufacturers to demonstrate that an aircraft is equipped with an interference-tolerant RA that meets the performance requirements in the current ADs. FAA has assessed the risk for these aircraft until a hypothetical initial RA performance deadline as late as 2032 and determined that the conditions of policy statement PS-AIR-600-39-01 will provide an acceptable risk mitigation, provided the terms and conditions of the voluntary commitments for the Lower C-band are extended to the initial RA performance deadline. An earlier compliance date would reduce the risk. As addressed in the Schedule section E.2, FAA is soliciting comments on the achievable initial and final RA performance deadline.
There are also a small number of transport category airplanes operating under the restrictions prescribed in the current ADs. ^{54} FAA has assessed the risk for operators of those airplanes and determined that the existing operating limitations are sufficient until the final RA performance deadline to address the additional sources of interference that may arise from Upper C-band wireless services aligned with Lower C-band technical rules.
FAA also issued ADs applicable to helicopters, ^{55} where the interference from Lower C-band wireless services posed an unsafe condition. FAA has evaluated the additional risk to helicopter operators from Upper C-band wireless services aligned with Lower C-band technical rules and determined that the scope and conditions of the current helicopter AD are adequate until the final RA performance deadline. NVG operations under § 91.205 will continue to require an FAA exemption for aircraft not equipped with RA systems that meet the new performance requirements.
Finally, FAA had identified a number of aircraft systems that could be affected by erroneous RA data and issued SAFO 21007 ^{56} to advise operators of the potential for erroneous or degraded RA output as it relates to those operations. The SAFO would remain in effect until aircraft comply with the proposed RA system requirements.
As FAA would end the accommodation of Lower C-band interference-tolerant RA systems at the initial RA performance deadline, several policies would end at that time. A current Flight Standards policy memo ^{57} would be canceled at the initial RA performance deadline. This policy memo requires an additional C-band assessment for specific new or amended CAT II/III and SA CAT I/II instrument approach procedures, primarily impacting the development of new procedures at airports that are not on the list of 188 CMAs. These additional requirements would no longer be necessary to support safe operations after the initial RA performance deadline.
FAA would withdraw PS-AIR-600-39-01 after the initial RA performance deadline. If there were aircraft that upgraded to Lower C-band tolerant equipment but did not subsequently upgrade to comply with the proposed 91.220(b), the relevant AD would need to be updated to restore the original operating limitations to reflect the sunset of the Lower C-band commitments and the onset of Upper C-band emissions.
After the final RA performance deadline, FAA may elect to remove the ADs as they would be made obsolete by the proposed RA requirements.
FAA will also be evaluating if any frequencies in the Lower and Upper C-band should be added to the Colo Void Policy ^{58} after the final RA performance deadline. The Colo Void Policy identifies frequencies that do not need to provide notice to FAA for a construction or alteration under 14 CFR part 77 because FAA has studied any potential impacts and found that the frequency is not a hazard to aviation safety. C-band frequencies cannot be added to the list of exempted frequencies until after the final RA performance deadline because wireless base station locations would still be required to support aircraft-specific AMOCs after the initial RA performance deadline.

I. Alternatives Considered
An alternative to this retrofit requirement would be for FAA to evaluate whether an unsafe condition is created by changes in the RF environment and issue additional ADs as appropriate. That alternative would not regain the full safety benefits of RA systems, would have a significant impact on aircraft operational capability by imposing new limitations for aircraft with RA systems that are currently compliant (limiting some aircraft from operating at all airports where C-band wireless base stations transmit and limiting low-visibility access for all aircraft), and would create market instability both for the aviation and wireless industries. Because ADs would be issued after FCC finalized service rules, ADs would impose severe operational limitations until the aviation industry has sufficient time to dedicate the necessary capital and resources to the appropriate RA upgrades and replacements. In addition, ADs would require an extension to the current voluntary wireless agreements or amendments to the current FCC R&O necessary to ensure long-term safe coexistence with Lower C-band wireless service, potentially exposing more severe operating conditions if the wireless service providers do not agree to indefinitely extend the voluntary agreements. Because ADs are not applicable to non-U.S. registered aircraft, other methods would also be required to ensure safety for part 129 foreign air carriers, such as issuing notices to airmen (NOTAM) and amending the U.S. Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) to address changes in the spectrum environment. In addition, FCC would have to determine the new Upper C-band wireless environment without a compatible RA standard. This may result in wireless interference that cannot be safely accommodated even with new RA systems, which would indefinitely prohibit certain aircraft from operating in the U.S. and prohibit all low-visibility approach and landing operations. The absence of a compatible standard could also result in FCC authorizing less spectrum than could otherwise be safely accommodated, such as if only 100 MHz were authorized. In the best case, FCC would define the Upper C-band wireless environment that is aligned with the feasible RA performance. However, this would not ensure that aircraft upgrade to suitable RA systems in time to avoid severe operational disruption.
Similarly, an alternative where FAA delays the proposed performance requirement until completion of the new RTCA/EUROCAE standards would introduce the same costs, limitations, and risks.
Another alternative, where FAA does not evaluate and address any unsafe conditions that would be created by changes in the RF environment, would create unacceptable catastrophic risks and would not address FAA's statutory mandate to ensure safe operations in the NAS. FAA risk assessments in support of the ADs issued to date ^{59} found the most significant risks are to operations in very low visibility and aircraft-specific risks with dependent safety systems. FAA has previously determined that training, service bulletins, and guidance would not be sufficient to overcome the high likelihood of hazardously misleading or missing RA information impacting multiple aircraft safety systems, some of which are required by legislation and regulations in large part due to fatal accidents in the past.
FAA also considered a two-phase implementation, with the goal of enabling earlier access to less than 100 MHz as soon as possible and transitioning to the next generation RA as a second phase. However, due to the existing RA performance (see Section IV.C), any early wireless access that requires an interim retrofit for safe operations would impose a significant additional cost on the aviation industry, requiring operators to procure and install interim RA solutions available now that are not likely to meet these proposed RA performance requirements. Increased demand and manufacturing requirements for an interim retrofit would also significantly extend the timeline for all operators to equip with RA systems that meet these proposed requirements, duplicating the requirements and efforts needed and diverting aviation manufacturers' resources and personnel who are working towards the development and certification of new RA systems that will meet the proposed RA performance requirements. Also, it would not result in the full 100 MHz being available to next-generation wireless services, requiring extensive and ongoing coordination, reduced power level, and constraints on wireless base station antenna height/elevation masks.

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
E.O. 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and E.O. 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) require agencies to regulate in the “most cost-effective manner,” to make a “reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs,” and to develop regulations that “impose the least burden on society.” The Office of Management and Budget has determined this proposed rulemaking is a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.

1. Statement of the Need for the Proposed Action

i. Description of Problem
Radio or Radar Altimeters (RAs) are devices that measure an aircraft's current height above terrain by sending out low-powered radar waves in the 4.2 to 4.4 GHz spectrum and measuring their return against the ground or other obstacles. The accurate height data RAs provide is crucial to a variety of automatic safety systems and is used by pilots in low-visibility situations. Since RAs utilize relatively low-powered transmissions, there is a risk that wireless signals, such as those emitted by next-generation wireless base stations utilizing adjacent spectrum bands, can interfere with or overpower the RA signal and result in missing or erroneous data. As was discussed in more detail in the preamble to the NPRM, the coming expiration of current voluntary commitments by wireless license holders to limit base station power level and out-of-band emissions in the Lower C-band spectrum (3.7-3.98 GHz) in 2028 and the upcoming FCC auction reallocating some or all of the Upper C-band spectrum (3.98-4.2 GHz) directly adjacent to the RA band are expected to exceed the ability of current avionics technology to mitigate the risk of spectrum interference and will create unacceptable risk to the NAS.

ii. Need for Regulation
Public Law 119-21 requires FCC to complete an auction of at least 100 MHz in the Upper C-band, and FAA has found that the associated authorization would cause existing RAs to experience interference and cause unsafe conditions. The upcoming auction would create an externality, defined as a market failure in OMB Circular A-4 occurring when one party's actions impose uncompensated benefits or costs on another party. ^{60} The proposed utilization of Upper C-band spectrum directly imposes uncompensated safety costs (increased risk of accidents) and fiscal costs (replacing RA systems to redress safety costs) to aircraft operators and the flying public.

iii. Summary of the Proposed Regulation
To address this risk, FAA proposes requiring the replacement of all existing RA systems with ones that meet the new interference tolerance performance standards for aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia. FAA is proposing RA performance requirements that reflect the best achievable interference rejection and without compromising the RA system performance. These requirements would apply first to all aircraft with an RA operating under 14 CFR part 121 and all aircraft with an RA operating under 14 CFR part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds, which have the highest expected level of safety and are the most critical to the national economy. All other aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia and equipped with RAs would have two additional years from the initial RA performance deadline to replace any RAs with units that meet the proposed performance requirement.

2. Baselines for the Analysis
To properly evaluate regulations, agencies must weigh the costs and benefits against a baseline. OMB Circular A-4 defines the “no action” baseline as “the best assessment of the way the world would look absent the proposed action.” It also specifies that the baseline “should incorporate the agency's best forecast of how the world will change in the future,” absent the regulation. FAA considers the primary baseline for this analysis to be a no action baseline, in which FAA assumes FCC completes the auction required by Public Law 119-21 and the voluntary commitments of the wireless service providers lapse. Under this scenario, FAA would have to react to the interference to prohibit all operations of certain aircraft makes and models and prohibit low-visibility operations in all aircraft, causing significant operational impacts. Aircraft owners would need to replace their RA systems to achieve compatibility with the new spectrum environment, if it is possible to do so. The inherent costs of delays, cancellations, and groundings resulting from re-imposing AD operational prohibitions under this no action baseline can be negated by the cost of retrofitting the RA system in compliance with proposed performance standards. FAA could also seek voluntary constraints from the wireless carriers in order to mitigate these aviation impacts. There is no assurance that an agreement could be reached, and that scenario could impact FCC as the constraints would not be known at the time of the auction.
These costs are based on the prior expansion of next-generation wireless services in the Lower C-band, where FAA issued 14 ADs for aircraft equipped with RAs. These ADs maintained the safety environment of the NAS by prohibiting operations when spectrum interference affects the accuracy of RA data critical for safe operation of the aircraft. To accomplish this goal, the ADs prohibited transport and commuter category airplanes without an upgraded RA from flying in very low visibility conditions (CAT II/III and other operations), prohibited rotorcraft without an upgraded RA from flying in specific automation modes dependent on RA data, and imposed additional operating restrictions on specific model airplanes with vital safety systems heavily tied to RA data. The airplane model-specific ADs cover Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, MHI RJ, and Airbus 220/Bombardier 500 models. All combined, these aircraft make up around 52 percent of the U.S. commercial fleet based on MITRE fleet data. ^{61} These ADs are still in effect, but do not significantly restrict operations currently due to operator compliance with lower C-band interference mitigation, including RA retrofits or other measures as specified in the ADs. If the spectrum environment changes due to the expiration of the voluntary commitments in 2028 or the utilization of the Upper C-band after FCC auction, the current AD compliance requirements would not be sufficient to mitigate the unsafe condition caused by interference with the RA. To maintain safety in the NAS, FAA would supersede the ADs along the same restrictions, with the potential for issuing additional ADs covering other operations or aircraft models as required, resulting in significant operational impact and baseline costs.
Along with the aircraft specific ADs, FAA would have additional ADs restricting operations in low visibility CAT II or III conditions, which would impact air travel in the NAS. In 2019, these conditions ranged from 0 to 1.14 percent of hours at the core 30 airports, ^{62} overall averaging 0.24 percent. ^{63} With over 56.5 million operations at towered airports in 2024, ^{64} AD limitations on flying in CAT II/III conditions would disrupt an average of 135,600 takeoffs and landings per year, inducing recurring delay, diversion, and cancellation costs to aircraft operators and the flying public until emission interference mitigation of the Upper C-band is achieved. These baseline costs from any effective reduction in NAS capacity due to the aircraft model and low-visibility weather ADs can be significant. For example, regarding similar limitations due to air traffic controller staffing constraints when FAA issued Emergency Order Establishing Operating Limitations on the Use of Navigable Airspace (90 FR 50884, Nov. 12, 2025), ^{65} Airlines for America (A4A) stated, “When the FAA flight-reduction order reaches 10% on Nov. 14, A4A estimates a daily average U.S. economic impact of $285 [million]-$580 [million], depending on the degree to which airlines can reaccommodate cancellation-disrupted passengers on the remaining flights.” ^{66}
Air carriers may choose to voluntarily upgrade their RA units to address potential interference concerns associated with the use of the Upper C-band spectrum, either to directly address the related safety risks to their aircraft or as a method of compliance with the new ADs to avoid the cost of capacity disruption. This action would limit both the operational impacts of the ADs and any impacts on the wireless industry's use of the spectrum. However, without the proposed rule, FAA is unable to assume the availability of Upper C-band compliant units or the extent and timeline of voluntary compliance.
FAA also considers an alternative pre-C-band utilization baseline, in which FAA avoids the prohibition of certain operations by achieving full fleet retrofit of RA systems to the proposed performance standards before any change in the spectrum environment. With no need for new ADs in this alternative baseline, only the costs of RA retrofit are considered in the current environment prior to the auction mandated by Public Law 119-21. With the pre-C-band utilization baseline representing a world where FAA considers mandating equipage of RAs that are tolerant to the Upper C-band spectrum and aircraft operators continue being able to fly without restrictions, baseline costs are $0.
As discussed in the preamble, RAs are not directly required by regulation for most aircraft, except for NVG operations under § 91.205(h)(7) and for rotorcraft operations under § 135.160, but are still carried on nearly all commercial and many noncommercial aircraft due to the vital role they play in the safety of aircraft operations by providing critical information directly to pilots and for mandated safety systems such as TCAS, TAWS, and other functions like autoland. Some aircraft may only need one RA unit, but given how vital the information is to safe operation, many commercial aircraft use two or more RA units to ensure accurate data. Using April 2025 data from MITRE, FAA estimates that there are roughly 58,579 RA units across 40,871 aircraft in the current operating civilian fleet (including many State-owned aircraft) that would be affected by the proposed rule. ^{67} This estimate is likely an overcount as FAA currently lacks data to specify which U.S. aircraft operate solely in Alaska or Hawaii, which would not be subject to this proposed rule. Conversely, though the proposed performance requirements would apply to all aircraft equipped with an RA operating in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia, military and Federal law enforcement-owned aircraft are not included in the estimates as FAA lacks data on RA-equipped aircraft totals and the costs to purchase and replace military RA units. The breakout of RAs by 14 CFR part operation and aircraft type can be found in Table 8:
Table 8—Number of Aircraft and RA Units by CFR Operation
CFR operational part | Aircraft type | Count of aircraft | Count of RA units
Part 91 | Airplane | 16,657 | 18,452
| Rotorcraft | 2,818 | 2,819
Part 121 | Airplane | 8,014 | 17,033
| Rotorcraft | |
Part 129 ^1 | Airplane | 5,050 | 11,127
| Rotorcraft | 18 | 27
Part 135 | Airplane | 6,385 | 7,151
| Rotorcraft | 1,929 | 1,970
Total | Airplane | 36,106 | 53,763
| Rotorcraft | 4,765 | 4,816
| Total | 40,871 | 58,579
^1 Part 129 totals only include aircraft that had at least one U.S. operation in the 17-month period from 04/01/2024 to 09/01/2025.
From the same MITRE data, Table 9 below shows the estimated number of operators of affected RA-equipped aircraft operating under the rules of each CFR part.
Table 9—Operators of RA Equipped Aircraft
CFR operational part | Number of operators
91 | 12,365
121 | 60
129 | 330
135 | 1,131
Total | 13,886
FAA requests comment, with supporting documentation, on the no action and pre-C-band utilization baseline estimates and assumptions.

3. Benefits
The benefits of this proposed rule stem from maintaining the safety benefits of RAs and preventing operational restrictions due to the high risk to aviation safety when utilizing current generation RA systems that are unable to filter out wireless signals ( e.g., Upper C-band wireless services aligned with Lower C-band technical rules, if allocated as proposed by FCC). Installing RA systems that meet the requirements of this proposed rule would limit the risk of inaccurate or missing height above terrain data, allowing air transportation operations to continue at their current tempo and safety environment. At the immediate safety level, having accurate data provided by the RA is essential information for pilots, especially in low-visibility airport operations that can affect, on average, 135,600 takeoffs and landings each year.
Beyond data provided directly to pilots, RA information is used by several mandated systems whose safety benefits this proposed rule aims to preserve. Systems such as TCAS and TAWS, which rely on accurate RA altitude data, provide pilots vital safety enhancements for collision avoidance. Since implementation, these systems have played a large role in significantly reducing mid-air collisions or CFIT accidents on equipped aircraft in the United States. ^{68} Additional aircraft systems that rely on RA information, such as autoflight functions, wind shear protection, and other aircraft-specific features, provide further unquantified safety benefits by aiding pilots in operating the aircraft and avoiding unsafe conditions.
Should interference-tolerant RAs not be available or mandated, FAA would supersede the current ADs to maintain the safety environment, with the potential to issue additional ADs covering other operations or aircraft models as needed. These ADs would maintain the appropriate level of safety in the NAS by preventing the operation of certain aircraft or in conditions where accurate RA data is vital to the safe operation, but do not retain the additional safety benefits generated by RAs and their dependent safety systems. There also would be further loss of economic benefits from the resulting groundings, cancellations, and delays of operational restrictions affecting the efficiency of air travel in the NAS. FAA currently lacks data to assess the estimated potential effects and requests comment with supporting documentation on the expected economic impact or on any other benefit assumption or estimate in this analysis.

4. Costs
Under the proposed rule, airlines and other operators would incur costs to retrofit their RA equipped aircraft with systems meeting the proposed RA interference tolerance standards. When issuing ADs in 2023 for transport and commuter category airplanes and for rotorcraft to mitigate interference from Lower C-band wireless services, FAA estimated that replacement of the RA transceiver unit for a civil aircraft would cost up to $80,000 for an airplane ^{69} and $40,000 for a rotorcraft, ^{70} inclusive of parts and labor. FAA acknowledges that the unit cost of the new and more complex RA units required by this rule may be greater and would result in an underestimation, but does not have any alternative estimates at this time since the new products are not yet available, and thus for purposes of this analysis uses estimates based on the current unit cost. These values assume replacement of just the RA transceiver unit, which for most aircraft is expected to be a “plug-and-play” operation requiring minimal labor hours, aircraft downtime, or time out of service, such as during regular maintenance. Retrofitting just the transceiver unit is expected to solve the spectrum interference issue and would not require changing out the RA antenna or wiring, which would greatly increase completion time and costs. Once installed, there are not any expected notable operational differences between the current RAs and the new units, so there are no estimated recurring costs associated with the new units after replacement. In addition, as this analysis uses current prices for RA units, there is no estimated price delta and therefore costs for future built aircraft using an Upper C-band compliant system. FAA requests comments, with supporting documentation, on the expected RA unit price difference, estimated future annual production of units, and any other cost assumptions or estimates presented in this analysis.
FAA proposes the compliance timeline to complete the retrofitting as two tranches. For the first, all aircraft with RAs operating under 14 CFR part 121, and those aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds, would have to retrofit with RA systems meeting the new performance requirements by the initial RA performance deadline. These operations are the most critical to the national economy and have the highest expected level of safety, making them a priority. FAA proposes that this initial RA performance deadline be between 2029 and 2032. Based on the fleet data from MITRE, FAA estimates there are roughly 27,374 RA units on aircraft subject to the first deadline: 17,033 used by domestic part 121 operators and 10,341 used by foreign part 129 operators. ^{71} Applying the $80,000 cost to the RA totals yields a total retrofit expense of $1.36 billion for part 121 operators and $827 million for part 129 operators, yielding a total undiscounted cost of $2.19 billion for the first group. FAA requests comment on the expected schedule of replacement or retrofit of RA units to Upper C-band tolerant systems to develop discounted cost estimates.
The second tranche includes any other aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia and equipped with an RA; they would have an additional two years after the initial RA performance deadline to complete the retrofit. FAA currently estimates that there are 31,205 RA units across this category, covering both airplanes and rotorcraft. ^{72} Applying the respective cost for airplanes and rotorcraft to the populations, FAA estimates an undiscounted cost of $2.30 billion to retrofit the remaining RA units in the second group. FAA requests comment on the expected Upper C-band tolerant RA adoption curve for this group of aircraft to develop a discounted cost total.
Combining the estimates from both groups, the expected undiscounted total cost of retrofitting RAs across the civil fleet is $4.49 billion. Table 10 shows the total and annualized costs, broken out by type of CFR operation and annualized discount rate.
FCC's NPRM section 3.D also discusses exploring options for potential incentivization or reimbursement of RA retrofits. This action would be considered a transfer of costs under OMB Circular A-4 accounting, reducing or eliminating the burden of RA system retrofit for aircraft operators. The availability of incentive or reimbursement payments could affect the rate at which RAs are replaced in response to the requirements of this proposed rule.
FAA requests comment with supporting documentation on the estimated costs.
Table 10—Costs of RA Replacement
[Millions of 2025$]
CFR operational part | Undiscounted total cost | Annualized costs ^1 | 3% Discount rate | 7% Discount rate
Part 91 | $1,589 | $107 | $150
Part 121 | 1,363 | 92 | 129
Part 129 | 891 | 60 | 84
Part 135 | 651 | 44 | 61
Total | 4,494 | 302 | 424
Notes: Columns may not sum due to rounding.
^1 Costs are annualized over a 20-year period, estimated to be the average remaining service life for current fleet aircraft.

5. Alternatives to Proposed Rule

Scenario 1: AD Operational Restrictions With No Retrofit Requirement (Baseline)
FAA considers this scenario as an alternative to the Pre-C-band Utilization Baseline. Without the availability of new interference-tolerant RAs, either due to failure to certify the new product in time, uncertainty regarding supply within the compliance timeframe, or not issuing the proposed regulations on RA performance, FAA would follow the actions presented in the baseline section and supersede the ADs covering Lower C-band interference based on changes in the spectrum environment to maintain current safety levels. Expiration of the wireless agreements in 2028 and expansion into frequencies closer to the RA band from the upcoming FCC auction would likely require prohibiting specific operations and grounding aircraft that cannot operate safely without interference-resistant RAs. These ADs would not be applicable to non-U.S. registered aircraft, so other methods would be required to ensure safety, such as issuing NOTAMs and amending the U.S. AIP to address changes in the spectrum environment.
The method by which the ADs would maintain the safety of the NAS is by prohibiting flights in low visibility conditions for aircraft that are heavily dependent on RA data for their safety systems. In doing so, safety is maintained by preventing scenarios where there is an unacceptable risk of incorrect RA data causing a catastrophic accident; however, this also comes with the loss of the additional safety benefits RAs and their dependent systems provide. The cost of these ADs would be flight delays and cancellations by operators, with spillover effects for the flying public.
FAA compares these grounding costs that may be incurred by aircraft operators to the costs within the pre-C-band utilization baseline to further consider this scenario. The International Bureau of Aviation (IBA) estimated in 2019 that the direct costs for an operator to ground a passenger jet like the Boeing 737 Max could be up to $150,000 per day. ^{73} Based on that value, grounding the 8,014 aircraft in part 121 under the weather and model restrictions of the ADs for just 4 days would cost operators $4.8 billion, exceeding the undiscounted cost of $4.49 billion to retrofit RAs for the entire civil fleet. Beyond the costs to operators of the aircraft, as a representation of how expensive airline delays and cancellations are to the economy, a 2010 FAA-commissioned study found the total delay impact of flight delays in 2007 cost the U.S. $32.9 billion between airline operators, passengers, and general economic welfare losses. ^{74} Adjusted forward using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), this equates to $51.2 billion in 2025 dollars. ^{75} If FAA has to issue new ADs and NOTAMs to maintain safety due to changes in the Upper C-band spectrum environment, approximately 4 percent of the part 121 fleet and 22 percent of the part 129 airplane fleet would not be able to operate in the contiguous U.S., ^{76} and the majority of the part 121 and part 129 fleets would experience delays due to prohibiting operations in low visibility conditions. The resulting economic consequences of shutting down portions of major domestic and international air carrier operations due to AD restrictions under this baseline would likely exceed the cost of the proposed rule well within the compliance period and incur additional recurring costs until the interference issue is addressed.
In this environment, industry would likely turn to the upcoming new RTCA/EUROCAE standards to guide development of Upper C-band tolerant RAs. However, due to the timeline mandated by Public Law 119-21, FCC would have to determine the new Upper C-band wireless environment prior to standards publication. This may result in FCC establishing an environment where wireless interference cannot be safely accommodated, even with new RA systems, which would have significant economic costs as FAA would indefinitely prohibit certain aircraft from operating in the U.S. and prohibit all low-visibility approach and landing operations. In the best case, FCC would define the Upper C-band wireless environment that is aligned to the feasible RA performance. Even then, awaiting the international standards to be published would delay the design and production of RAs that can accommodate the new spectrum environment, requiring FAA to use the more costly ADs to cover the safety gap until the fleet is fully equipped.
This scenario would also require an extension of the current voluntary wireless agreements to continue safe coexistence with Lower C-band wireless service and continue to mitigate operational limitations in the current ADs. FAA lacks the authority to compel wireless licensees to extend the voluntary agreements, and notes that, even if extended, new voluntary emission limits for safe RA use are not commercially viable for the Upper C-band wireless services (see section IV.C for discussion). The additional uncertainty and timeline pressure of interference tolerant RA availability would continue to inhibit wireless companies' usage of the C-band and would severely limit realizing the full value of the FCC spectrum auction and the general economic benefits of expanding spectrum usage compared to the proposed rule.

Scenario 2: No AD Operational Restrictions or Retrofit Requirement
If new interference-tolerant RA units are not developed or available, and the current ADs are withdrawn, FAA would be maintaining the current tempo of air operations, but would be accepting the risk of Upper C-band interference on the RA and all dependent aircraft safety systems. The most recent FAA risk assessments rated these risks from minor to catastrophic, with the most significant risks to operations in very low visibility ( e.g., CAT II/III, use of EFVS to touchdown, Autoland). In addition, aircraft with dependent safety systems may react incorrectly and catastrophically at low altitude due to erroneous or missing RA data. Training, service bulletins, and guidance will not be sufficient to overcome the high likelihood of hazardously misleading or missing RA information impacting multiple aircraft safety systems, some of which are required by legislation and regulations based on previous fatal accidents. In comparison to the no-action baseline, this scenario would retain economic benefits from maintaining the pace of air operations but is considered unacceptable, as FAA has a statutory responsibility to protect the safety of the NAS from the high level of risk this option creates.

6. Summary
This proposed rule aims to address a critical safety issue in the NAS, with the upcoming auction and proposed reallocation of the Upper C-band spectrum for next-generation wireless services posing a serious risk to the accuracy and usability of RAs. RAs provide height above terrain information, and the accuracy of its data is critical for low visibility operations and use in numerous mandated automatic safety systems. Without the ability to filter out neighboring C-band signals and prevent inaccurate or missing RA data, and absent the extension or modification of voluntary agreements from Upper C-band spectrum holders, FAA would have to issue ADs prohibiting the operation of certain aircraft and prohibiting specific operations in low visibility conditions to maintain the safety of the NAS.
To prevent this disruption to air operations and maintain high levels of aviation safety, FAA is proposing new regulations to require all RA systems meet specific minimum performance requirements on aircraft operating in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia by an initial performance deadline between 2029 and 2032 for all aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 121 and aircraft operating under part 129 with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds. All other aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia and equipped with an RA will have an additional two years after the initial performance deadline to use a unit that meets the proposed performance standard. These new RA systems must be resilient to interference from signals in neighboring spectrum bands and continue to provide accurate altitude readings to pilots and integrated aircraft safety systems.
FAA estimates the undiscounted total cost to retrofit all RAs in the civil fleet is $4.49 billion, or $424 million annualized at a 7 percent discount rate over a 20-year average remaining aircraft service life compared to the pre-C-band utilization baseline. Compared to the no-action baseline, FAA assumes relative cost savings for operators of RA equipped aircraft to retrofit to units that meet the new interference tolerance standards and therefore not be subject to the operating restrictions of the current ADs, which would also be required in future ADs. FAA requests comments, with supporting documentation, on the assumptions and estimates made in this RIA. As the estimated cost exceeds the threshold for an economically significant rule under section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866, FAA prepared the required OMB Circular A-4 accounting statements below.
Table 11—OMB Circular A-4 Accounting Statement, No-Action Baseline, U.S. and Non-U.S. Parties
[Millions of 2025$]
Category | 3-Percent discount rate | 7-Percent discount rate | Source citation (RIA. Preamble, etc.)
BENEFITS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • ADs maintain baseline safety in the NAS by prohibiting operations where RA interference presents unacceptable risk. | Preamble, RIA Section A.2.
| • Use of interference-tolerant RA units allows operators to keep safety benefits of RAs and their dependent systems.
| • Permits airlines with a retrofitted RA to maintain current schedule efficiency and reliability.
| • Allows FAA to remove ADs associated with RA interference once the fleet has fully equipped to upgraded RA systems.
COSTS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | N/A | N/A | Preamble RIA Section A.2.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • The baseline cost to aircraft operators includes recurring delays, cancellations, and groundings due to model and visibility operating restrictions covered by the ADs. These baseline costs can be negated by the cost of retrofitting RAs to be in compliance with the ADs. | Preamble, RIA Sections A.2 and A.4.
| • Retrofit costs include purchasing new RA transceiver units, installation is expected to be simple and done during regular maintenance cycles.
| • Split between two groups, first compliance requirement is all part 121 and 30+ seat or 7,500+ pounds payload capacity part 129 aircraft, all others will have two additional years to retrofit.
| • No expected operational or recurring cost differences between current and potential future RAs.
TRANSFERS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • FCC is requesting proposals to facilitate these retrofits from a financial perspective. | N/A.
| • Would allow full utilization of auctioned wireless spectrum.
State, Local, and/or Tribal Government | • Any state, local, or tribal governments that utilize aircraft with an RA onboard, such as police or search and rescue rotorcraft, will have restrictions on operating in conditions specified in the ADs. | Preamble, RIA Section A.4.
| | • The cost of not being able to utilize some aircraft under such conditions may be greater than the cost of retrofitting with an RA unit meeting the new performance standards.
Small Business | • Small businesses utilizing RA-equipped aircraft will be subject to restrictions of the ADs. | Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
| • Lost revenue and other expenses from groundings, delays, and cancellations stemming from the ADs are likely greater than the cost to retrofit RAs per the proposed standards of the rule.
| • Total cost to an entity is dependent on the size of their fleet.
Wages | N/A. | N/A.
Growth | N/A. | N/A.
Table 12—OMB Circular A-4 Accounting Statement, Pre-C-Band Utilization Baseline, Retrofit Cost to U.S. and Non-U.S. Parties
[Millions of 2025$]
Category | 3-Percent discount rate | 7-Percent discount rate | Source citation (RIA. Preamble, etc.)
BENEFITS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • Use of interference-tolerant units allows operators to keep safety benefits of RAs and their dependent systems. | Preamble, RIA Section A.3.
| • Permits airlines to maintain the current schedule efficiency and reliability.
| • Allows FAA to remove ADs associated with RA interference once the fleet has fully equipped to upgraded RA systems.
COSTS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | $302 | $424 | Preamble RIA Section A.4.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • Burden on operators of RA carrying aircraft to replace or retrofit to units that meet the new interference tolerance standards. | Preamble, RIA Section A.4.
| • Split between two groups, first compliance requirement is all 14 CFR part 121 and 30+ seat or 7,500+ pounds payload capacity part 129 aircraft, all others will have two additional years to retrofit.
| • Primary cost is purchasing new RA transceiver units, installation is expected to be simple and done during regular maintenance cycles.
| • No expected operational or recurring cost differences between current and potential future RAs.
TRANSFERS
Annualized Monetized $millions/year | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Annualized Quantified | N/A | N/A | N/A.
Qualitative | • FCC is requesting proposals to facilitate these retrofits from a financial perspective. | N/A.
| • Would allow full utilization of auctioned wireless spectrum.
State, Local, and/or Tribal Government | Any state, local, or tribal governments that utilize aircraft with an RA onboard, such as police or search and rescue rotorcraft, will incur costs to replace the unit with an interference-tolerant version. | Preamble, RIA Section A.4.
Small Business | Small businesses will incur $40k to $80k in costs per aircraft to retrofit with an RA that meets the proposed performance requirement. Total cost to an entity is dependent on the size of their fleet. | Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
| Wages | N/A. | N/A.
Growth | N/A. | N/A.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164 (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, Mar. 29, 1996) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-240, 124 Stat. 2504 Sept. 27, 2010), requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory action on small business and other small entities and to minimize any significant economic impact. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
FAA is publishing this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) to aid the public in commenting on the potential impacts to small entities from this proposal. FAA invites interested parties to submit data and information regarding the potential economic impact that would result from the proposal. FAA will consider comments when making a determination or when completing a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
Under Section 603(b) and (c) of the RFA, an IRFA must contain the following:
(1) A description of the reasons why the action by the agency is being considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the objective of, and legal basis for, the proposed rule;
(3) A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
(4) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule; and
(6) A description of any significant alternatives to the proposed rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.

1. Reasons the Action Is Being Considered
This rule is being proposed to address a critical safety issue with RAs. RAs are dependent on receiving faint waves in the 4.2 to 4.4 GHz spectrum reflected by terrain and obstacles to determine the aircraft's height above the terrain. Higher power signals in neighboring spectrum bands, such as those emitted by next-generation wireless services, can interfere with the RA waves and cause the unit to indicate missing or erroneous data. In turn, the lack of accurate height above terrain data presents a significant safety risk for pilots operating in low-visibility conditions and affects numerous safety systems that are dependent on RA information. These issues have been previously mitigated with wireless companies voluntarily agreeing to limit base station power level and out-of-band emissions in the Lower C-band (3.7 to 3.98 GHz) and operators making changes to their RA units to improve interference tolerance. However, with the voluntary agreements expiring in 2028, and the mandate for FCC to auction off the Upper C-band spectrum (3.98 to 4.2 GHz) adjacent to the RA band, these measures will no longer be adequate to prevent RA interference and associated catastrophic risk to air operations.

2. Objectives and Legal Basis of the Proposed Rule
To address the safety issue from wireless interference, this rule proposes that all RA units on aircraft operating under part 91 in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia must be replaced by new RA systems that meet the proposed interference tolerance requirements. RA systems that meet the new requirements will continue to function properly when the Lower and Upper C-band wireless services become active following FCC auction and expiration of the voluntary Lower C-band wireless agreements. Installing these interference-tolerant RAs in the fleet would allow air operations to continue at their current tempo and preserve safety levels provided by the benefits of accurate RA data and its use in numerous dependent safety systems. In the absence of requiring interference-tolerant RAs, FAA would issue ADs to maintain the safety environment, which would cost operators more over time due to groundings, delays, and cancellations of aircraft operations.
The legal basis for this action lies in FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of FAA's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the authority of the Administrator to promulgate and revise regulations and rules related to aviation safety. This rulemaking is also issued under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, FAA is charged with prescribing regulations promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce.

3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities
FAA used the definition of small entities in the RFA for this analysis. The RFA defines small entities as small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, or small organizations. In 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the RFA defines “small business” to have the same meaning as “small business concern” under section 3 of the Small Business Act. The Small Business Act authorizes the Small Business Administration (SBA) to define “small business” by issuing regulations.
SBA (2023) has established size standards for various types of economic activities, or industries, under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). ^{77} These size standards generally define small businesses based on the number of employees or annual receipts. Table 13 shows the SBA size standards for airlines as an example. Note that the SBA definition of a small business applies to the parent company and all affiliates as a single entity.
Table 13—Small Business Size Standards: Air Transportation
NAICS code | Description | Size standard
481111 | Scheduled Passenger Air Transportation | 1,500 employees.
481112 | Scheduled Freight Air Transportation | 1,500 employees.
481211 | Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger Air Transportation | 1,500 employees.
481212 | Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation | 1,500 employees.
481219 | Other Nonscheduled Air Transportation | $25.0 million.
Source: SBA (2023).
NAICS = North American Industrial Classification System.
SBA = Small Business Administration.
To identify small entities, FAA first identified the primary NAICS of the airline or parent company and then used data from different sources ( e.g., company annual reports, FAA operator data, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, D&B Hoovers) to determine whether the airline meets the applicable size standard. Table 14 provides a summary of the results.
Table 14—Estimated Number of Small Entities
CFR operational part | Number of entities | Number small entities | Percent small entities
Part 91 ^1 | 12,365 | 11,371 | 91.95
Part 121 | 60 | 35 | 58.3
Part 135 | 1,131 | 1,114 | 98.5
Total | 13,535 | 12,520 | 92.5
^1 The percent of part 91 small entities, and resulting total number of small entities, is based on a random sample of 373 operators. This estimate is likely an overcount as FAA is unable to remove private/GA aircraft owners from its dataset.
In general, entities classified as scheduled air transportation (NAICS 481111 and 481112) operate under part 121, and entities engaged in nonscheduled air transportation (NAICS 481211 and 481212) operate under part 135. Part 91 operations include entities under NAICS 481219, such as air clubs and sightseeing operations, as well as entities in any other non-air transportation NAICS code that own and operate aircraft for private use or internal company transportation.

4. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
In the absence of cost data on a future product, FAA assumes the cost to retrofit an interference-tolerant RA in accordance with this proposed rule is up to $80,000 for an airplane and $40,000 for a rotorcraft, based on the 2023 ADs concerning Lower C-band interference mitigation. ^{78} Therefore, the cost to each entity is based on how many aircraft are in their fleet, which induces higher costs to larger operators that have larger fleets. However, since operations and resulting revenue scale with fleet size as well, larger firms may be able to better absorb those increased costs compared to small entities with only one or two aircraft. By applying these equipment costs to the average number of aircraft for a small entity based on its size category, FAA estimates the average one-time RA replacement cost per small entity. These costs are then weighed against the average annual revenue per small entity data from the 2022 U.S. Census Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB), ^{79} displayed in table 15 for part 121 operators and table 16 for part 135 operators.
Table 15—Part 121 Cost of Compliance
[Thousands of 2025$]
Number of employees | Number of small entities | Average number of aircraft | Average one-time RA cost per entity ^1 | Average annual revenues per entity ^2 | Average cost/annual revenue (%)
20-99 employees | 9 | 4 | $356 | $69,356 | 0.5
100-499 employees | 18 | 13 | 1,031 | 246,082 | 0.4
500+ employees | 8 | 29 | 2,310 | 5,075,566 | 0.0
Notes: Rows may not sum due to rounding.
^1 Based on a unit and labor cost of $80,000 for a new RA.
^2 FAA estimates receipts per entity using 2022 SUSB data on NAICS 48111 firm counts and receipts. Receipts are adjusted to 2025 dollars using the BLS Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (Series ID: CUUR0000SA0).
Table 16—Part 135 Cost of Compliance
[Thousands of 2025$]
Number of employees | Number of small entities | Average number of aircraft | Average one-time RA cost per entity ^1 | Average annual revenues per entity ^2 | Average cost/annual revenue (%)
1-19 employees | 640 | 2 | $155 | $2,906 | 6.8
20-99 employees | 376 | 7 | 469 | 21,400 | 2.8
100-499 employees | 76 | 20 | 1,402 | 84,939 | 2.1
500+ employees | 22 | 75 | 5,301 | 250,641 | 2.7
Notes: Rows may not sum due to rounding.
^1 Based on RA unit and labor cost of $80,000 for aircraft and $40,000 rotorcraft, applied by the ratio of each type within part 135.
^2 FAA estimates receipts per entity using 2022 SUSB data on NAICS 48112 firm counts and receipts. Receipts are adjusted to 2025 dollars using the BLS Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (Series ID: CUUR0000SA0).
FAA does not estimate the per entity costs for part 91 operators, as companies operating under this section are generally not engaged in commercial air transportation services. While there are some operators for sightseeing services or aviation club activities under NAICS 481219, the vast majority of these aircraft are used by private operators or entities for personal transportation across many different industries ( i.e. corporate jets). This is reflected in the fleet data FAA used, as roughly 90 percent of operators under part 91 only have one aircraft, and another eight percent operate just two. Depending on whether the RA unit is used in automated aircraft safety systems or not, some part 91 operators may even have the choice to simply remove their RA after the proposed rule takes effect to avoid the replacement cost, though they would not retain the safety benefits RAs provide as discussed in section V.3. Entities that choose to replace the RA may also have access to noncommercial use units at lower cost than the estimated $40,000-$80,000. However, without information on what models manufacturers will provide in the future, FAA is unable to determine a potential reduction in burden.

5. All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule.

6. Significant Alternatives Considered
As discussed in Section V.A.5 of the preamble, the alternative to not requiring the use of interference-tolerant RAs would be for FAA to supersede the current ADs to impose new requirements curtailing operations where inaccurate RA data poses a catastrophic risk to air safety. These ADs would cover commuter and transport category airplanes, rotorcraft, and some specific large passenger aircraft, with potential as needed for FAA to issue additional ADs based on changes in the C-band spectrum environment. The cost of these ADs is likely to outweigh the cost of retrofitting with an interference-tolerant RA in expenses incurred from resulting groundings, cancellations, and delays. The option of not controlling the risk of spectrum interference with ADs or requiring interference-tolerant RAs is not considered acceptable as FAA has a statutory responsibility to protect the safety of the NAS. FAA requests comments on alternatives to the proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives of the applicable statutes, and that minimize impact of the proposed rule on small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, they be the basis for U.S. standards.
FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and determined that it ensures the safety of the American public. If this proposed rule is not implemented, there would be no cost savings and no significant differences in the potential impacts to foreign commerce. In the absence of new regulations, FAA will have to issue new or amended ADs to address U.S. registered aircraft, as well as other necessary policy changes directly relevant to foreign air carriers to prevent catastrophic risk to aviation safety due to future changes in the spectrum environment. The cost of compliance with the ADs would likely be higher than the cost of compliance with the proposed rule, as a lack of RA retrofit compliance would result in significant impacts to domestic and foreign air carrier capacity, efficiency, and schedule reliability. As a result, FAA does not consider this proposed rule as creating an unnecessary obstacle to foreign commerce and welcomes comment on this assessment.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). The value equivalent of $100 million in 1995 adjusted for inflation using the most current Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product is $187 million. Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires FAA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows FAA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.
This proposed rule would not result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, of more than $187 million annually, but would result in the expenditure of that magnitude by airlines and other private operators of RA-equipped aircraft. This document seeks comments on the alternatives presented in section V.A.5 for achieving the purposes of FAA's safety mandate in support of the spectrum auction mandate of Public Law 119-21 (One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act).

E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public. According to the 1995 amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
FAA has determined there would be no new information collection associated with the proposed requirement to operate aircraft with RA systems that comply with the specified performance. This proposed requirement will update the RA performance standard, but there will be no new requirements beyond existing policy.

F. International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) to the maximum extent practicable. FAA has determined that there are currently no ICAO SARPs that correspond to these proposed regulations. ICAO is planning updates to Annex 10 Volume V intended to help protect RAs from potentially harmful in-band and adjacent band interference caused by non-aeronautical systems operating in adjacent frequency bands. FAA will continue to work with the international community to promote the spectrum compatibility achieved by the proposed next generation RA system requirements.
Considering these SARPs have yet to be finalized, FAA seeks comment on the interoperability of the proposed RA requirements across international airspace and the feasibility of making such updates within the proposed compliance timeline.

G. Environmental Analysis
The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this proposed rule pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ). FAA has determined that this rule is categorically excluded pursuant to Paragraph B-2.6(d) of Appendix B to FAA Order 1050.1G, FAA National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (90 FR 29615, July 3, 2025). Categorical exclusions are categories of actions that the agency has determined normally do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and therefore do not require either an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement (EIS). See DOT Order 5610.1D § 9. In analyzing the applicability of a categorical exclusion, the agency must also consider whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. Id. § 9(b). This rulemaking, which requires all RAs to meet specific minimum performance requirements to support resilience to interference from wireless signals in neighboring spectrum bands, is categorically excluded pursuant to Paragraph B-2.6(d) of FAA Order 1050.1G: “Issuance of regulatory documents ( e.g., Notices of Proposed Rulemaking and issuance of Final Rules) covering administrative or procedural requirements. (Does not include air traffic procedures; specific air traffic procedures that are categorically excluded are identified under Appendix B, Paragraph B-2.5 of this Order).” FAA does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska
Section 1205 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3213) requires the Administrator, when modifying 14 CFR regulations in a manner affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to consider the extent to which Alaska is not served by transportation modes other than aviation, and to establish appropriate regulatory distinctions. FAA expects reduced impact because this proposed rule would not apply to aircraft equipped with RA that only conduct intrastate operations in Alaska. However, this proposed rule could, if adopted, affect aviation operations in Alaska because it applies to aircraft equipped with RA based in Alaska that operate regularly to the 48 contiguous United States, or aircraft based in the 48 contiguous United States that operate regularly to and from Alaska. FCC is proposing to preserve the status quo regarding its current licenses outside of the contiguous United States, which would be permitted to continue in the entire 3.7-4.2 GHz band. FCC notes that its proposal to only reallocate spectrum within the contiguous U.S. would ensure the ongoing provision of current C-band services necessary to protect life and property outside the contiguous U.S.—including telehealth, E911, and education services—for which C-band service may be the only option available, such as in remote areas of Alaska. Therefore, FAA specifically requests comments on the suitability of applying the proposed rule differently for intrastate operations in Alaska.

VI. E.O. Determinations

A. E.O. 13132, Federalism
FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and criteria of E.O. 13132, Federalism. FAA has determined this action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and, therefore, would not have federalism implications.

B. E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Consistent with E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, ^{80} and FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and Procedures, ^{81} FAA ensures Federally Recognized Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity to provide meaningful and timely input regarding proposed Federal actions that have the potential to affect uniquely or significantly their respective Tribes. At this point, FAA has not identified any unique or significant effects, environmental or otherwise, on Tribes resulting from this proposed rule.

C. E.O. 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
FAA analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). FAA has determined it would not be a “significant energy action” under the E.O. and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

D. E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation
E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to (1) meet shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and reduce, eliminate, or (2) prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. FAA has analyzed this action under the policy and agency responsibilities of E.O. 13609. FAA has determined this action would help prevent future differences between U.S. aviation standards and those of other CAAs by being the first nation to adopt and require these new RA system performance standards, to set a standard for future harmonization with other CAAs, and inform future wireless standards for the spectrum authorities of other nations who are considering similar spectrum reallocation near the RA band.

E. Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation) requires that, for each new regulatory rule, an agency must identify 10 prior regulations for elimination. This proposed rule responds to statutory requirements of section 40002 of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which re-institutes FCC's general auction authority and specifically directs the Commission to complete a system of competitive bidding for not less than 100 megahertz in the Upper C-band. To ensure safe, efficient, and reliable aviation operations in the presence of wireless signals in the Upper C-band, FAA is proposing new regulations that would require all RAs to meet specific minimum performance requirements. This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be an E.O. 14192 regulatory action.

VII. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited
FAA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. FAA also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should submit only one time if comments are filed electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of written comments if comments are filed in writing.
FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rule. Before acting on this proposal, FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before the closing date for comments. FAA will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. FAA may change this proposal in light of the comments it receives.
FCC has initiated a rulemaking on repurposing the 3.98-4.2 GHz band for advanced wireless services consistent with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. As part of that rulemaking, FCC seeks comments on issues related to adjacent band coexistence. ^{82} Interested parties should also submit comments in FCC's proceeding.

B. Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Any commentary FAA receives that is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

C. Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of this NPRM, all comments received, any final rule, and all background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the docket number listed above. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded from the Office of the Federal Register's website at www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website at www.govinfo.gov . A copy may also be found at FAA's Regulations and Policies website at www.faa.gov/regulations_policies .
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677. Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this rulemaking.
All documents FAA considered in developing this proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in the electronic docket for this rulemaking.

D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104 121, 110 Stat. 857, Mar. 29, 1996) requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this document may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/ .

Endnotes
^1 RA systems are generally comprised of a transceiver, cabling, and antennas. When necessary, different terms are used throughout the NPRM to discuss the RA system as a whole or specific parts of it.
^2 Available at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1022884849315 .
^3 Public Law 119-21 (July 4, 2025), available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1 .
^4 In the Matter of Upper C-band (3.98-4.2 GHz), 90 FR 56076 (proposed December 5, 2025) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/05/2025-22020/in-the-matter-of-upper-c-band-398-42-ghz .
^5 Letter from Henry G. Hultquist, Vice President-Federal Regulatory, AT&T Services, Inc., et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 18-122 (filed Mar. 31, 2023) (discussing voluntary commitments), available at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1033142661477 .
^6 https://www.rtca.org/sc-239/ .
^7 https://www.eurocae.net/working-group/wg-119/ .
^8 See Letter from Dorothy B. Reimold, Vice President Civil Aviation, Aerospace Industries Assoc., et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 25-59, at 1-2 (filed Aug. 21, 2025).
^9 National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) Comments re Upper C-band NOI, available at: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1080426626787 .
^{10} Speech: “Downward Pressure on the Accident Rate”. Nicholas A. Sabatini. International Society of Air Safety Investigators. May 12, 2006. Retrieved September 2025 from China Aviation Daily, http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/0/456.html .
^{11} The aircraft used in this analysis average 14 to 21 years in age depending on CFR operation. While aircraft retirement age can vary significantly depending on multiple factors, FAA assumes impacted aircraft will average 20 more years of service with an updated RA system installed.
^{12} In the Matter of Expanding Flexible Use in the 3.7-4.2 GHz Band, GN Docket No. 18-122, Federal Communications Commission (March 3, 2020), available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-expands-flexible-use-c-band-5g-0 .
^{13} RTCA Paper No. 274-20/PMC-2073, Assessment of C-Band Mobile Telecommunications Interference Impact on Low Range Radar Altimeter Options, dated October 7, 2020, page i. This document is available on www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2021-0953, and at https://www.rtca.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/SC-239-5G-Interference-Assessment-Report_274-20-PMC-2073_accepted_changes.pdf .
^{14} Airworthiness Directive; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes, 86 FR 69984 (12/09/21) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/09/2021-26777/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes .
^{15} Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters 86 FR 6992 (12/09/21) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/09/2021-26779/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters .
^{16} AD 2022-03-05 for Boeing 747-8 and 777 models, AD 2022-02-16 for Boeing 787 models, AD 2022-03-20 for newer Boeing 737 models, AD 2022-04-05 for Boeing 757 and 767 models, AD 2022-05-04 for older Boeing 737 models, AD 2022-06-16 for older Boeing 747 models, and AD 2022-09-18 for legacy McDonnell Douglas models.
^{17} https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-announces-winning-bidders-37-ghz-service-auction .
^{18} For example, one voluntary agreement is available at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1033142661477 .
^{19} Airworthiness Directives; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes, 88 FR 34065 (May 26, 2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes .
^{20} Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters, 88 FR 40685 (June 22, 2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/22/2023-13319/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters .
^{21} AD 2023-12-05 for Boeing 747-8 and 777 models, AD 2023-12-10 for Boeing 787 models, AD 2023-12-11 for newer Boeing 737 models, AD 2023-12-12 for Boeing 757 and 767 models, AD 2023-12-13 for older Boeing 737 models, AD 2023-12-14 for older Boeing 747 models, and AD 2023-12-15 for legacy McDonnell Douglas models.
^{22} AD 2025-04-08 for MHI RJ regional jet models; AD 2023-06-13 for Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 airplanes, which was subsequently replaced by AD 2023-14-01; AD 2023-03-06 for Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and -1A11 airplanes, which was subsequently replaced by AD 2023-13-15; AD 2023-06-13 for Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 airplanes; and AD 2023-14-02 for Airbus Model BD-500-1A10 and -1A11 airplanes.
^{23} https://www.rtca.org/sc-239/.
^{24} https://www.eurocae.net/working-group/wg-119/.
^{25} See Letter from Dorothy B. Reimold, Vice President Civil Aviation, Aerospace Industries Assoc., et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 25-59, at 1-2 (filed Aug. 21, 2025).
^{26} Minimum Performance Standards—Airborne Ground Proximity Warning Equipment, RTCA/DO-161A, RTCA Incorporated.
^{27} Ground Proximity Warning Systems, 39 FR 44439 (Dec. 18, 1974).
^{28} Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 30; Ground Proximity Warning System, 43 FR 28176 (June 29, 1978).
^{29} Ground Proximity Warning Systems, 57 FR 9944 (March 20, 1992).
^{30} Terrain Awareness and Warning System, 65 FR 16736 (March 29, 2001).
^{31} Public Law 100-223, 101 Stat. 1486 (1987), available at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/STATUTE-101/STATUTE-101-Pg1486 .
^{32} Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, 54 FR 940 (Jan. 10, 1989).
^{33} Collision Avoidance Systems, 68 FR 15884 (Apr. 1, 2003).
^{34} Regulation of Fractional Aircraft Ownership Programs and On-Demand Operations, 68 FR 54520 (Sept. 17, 2003).
^{35} See Airborne Low-Altitude Windshear Equipment Requirements, 55 FR 13236 (Apr. 9, 1990).
^{36} Public Law 112-95, 126 Stat. 11 (Feb. 14, 2012) available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/658/text .
^{37} Helicopter Air Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter, and Part 91 Helicopter Operations, 79 FR 9932 (Feb. 21, 2014), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/02/21/2014-03689/helicopter-air-ambulance-commercial-helicopter-and-part-91-helicopter-operations .
^{38} Integration of Powered-Lift: Pilot Certification and Operations; Miscellaneous Amendments Related to Rotorcraft and Airplanes, 89 FR 92296 (Nov. 21, 2024), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/11/21/2024-24886/integration-of-powered-lift-pilot-certification-and-operations-miscellaneous-amendments-related-to .
^{39} Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification, 74 FR 42500 (Aug. 21, 2009).
^{40} https://my.rtca.org/productdetails?id=a1B36000001IcnqEAC .
^{41} https://www.eurocae.net/product/ed-30-mps-for-airborne-low-range-radio-radar-altimeter-equipment/ .
^{42} https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/3E13DA064E29A5F586257A1B005889A8.0001 .
^{43} Airworthiness Directives; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes, 88 FR 34065 (May 26, 2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes .
^{44} See Letter from Dorothy B. Reimold, Vice President Civil Aviation, Aerospace Industries Assoc., et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 25-59, at 1-2 (filed Aug. 21, 2025).
^{45} FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 20-199, Installation of an Airborne Low-Range Radio Altimeter System, will be available for review and comment at https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs, under “Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) Draft Documents”
^{46} NPRM published in 90 FR 38212.
^{47} https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2023-title49/pdf/USCODE-2023-title49-subtitleVII-partA-subpartiii-chap448-sec44809.pdf .
^{48} In the Matter of Upper C-band (3.98-4.2 GHz), 90 FR 56076 (proposed December 5, 2025), paragraph 20, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/05/2025-22020/in-the-matter-of-upper-c-band-398-42-ghz .
^{49} In the Matter of Upper C-band (3.98-4.2 GHz), 90 FR 56076 (proposed December 5, 2025), paragraphs 119-122, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/05/2025-22020/in-the-matter-of-upper-c-band-398-42-ghz .
^{50} Defined as conducting at least one U.S. operation between 04/01/2024 and 09/01/2025.
^{51} AC 150/5390-2D, Heliport Design, available at https://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.current/documentnumber/150_5390-2 .
^{52} Letter from Henry G. Hultquist, Vice President-Federal Regulatory, AT&T Services, Inc., et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 18-122 (filed Mar. 31, 2023) (discussing voluntary commitments), available at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1033142661477.https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/1033142661477 .
^{53} Demonstration of Radio Altimeter Tolerant Aircraft, 88 FR 46055 (July 19, 2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/07/19/2023-14927/demonstration-of-radio-altimeter-tolerant-aircraft .
^{54} Airworthiness Directives; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes, 88 FR 34065 (05/26/2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes .
^{55} Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters, 88 FR 40685 (06/22/2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/22/2023-13319/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters .
^{56} Risk of Potential Adverse Effects on Radio Altimeters (RA) when Operating in the Presence of 5G C-Band Wireless Broadband Signals, SAFO 21007 (Dec. 23, 2021), available at https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/safo/all_safos/SAFO21007R1.pdf .
^{57} Clarification to FAA Order 8400.13, Procedures for the Evaluation and Approval of Facilities for Special Authorization Category I Operations and All Category II and III Operations, available at https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afx/afs/afs400/afs420/order_ac_memo/Clarification_Order_8400.13_5G-C-Band.pdf .
^{58} Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna Systems Co-Location; Voluntary Best Practices, 87 FR 39746 (July 5, 2022), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/07/05/2022-14306/colo-void-clause-coalition-antenna-systems-co-location-voluntary-best-practices .
^{59} Airworthiness Directives; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes, 88 FR 34065 (May 26, 2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes ; Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters, 88 FR 40685 (June 22, 2023) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/22/2023-13319/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters ; and AD 2023-12-05 for Boeing 747-8 and 777 models, AD 2023-12-10 for Boeing 787 models, AD 2023-12-11 for newer Boeing 737 models, AD 2023-12-12 for Boeing 757 and 767 models, AD 2023-12-13 for older Boeing 737 models, AD 2023-12-14 for older Boeing 747 models, and AD 2023-12-15 for legacy McDonnell Douglas models.
^{60} OMB Circular A-4 can be found at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/CircularA-4.pdf .
^{61} The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) is a private, not-for-profit company that provides research and development services, primarily to the federal government. The data provided by MITRE consists of FAA fleet data combined with RA equipage specifications and number of aircraft operations.
^{62} The core 30 airports are the busiest 30 U.S. commercial airports by passenger emplacements, the list of which can be found at https://www.aspm.faa.gov/aspmhelp/index/Core_30.html .
^{63} The Aerology analysis of 2019 METAR data from the core 30 airports can be found at https://aerology.substack.com/p/what-does-low-visibility-mean .
^{64} Data on operations is sourced from the FAA Operations Network (OPSNET), with the 2024 data provided in the most recent FAA Air Traffic by the Numbers found at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/by_the_numbers .
^{65} The airspace limitation order can be found at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/12/2025-19850/emergency-order-establishing-operating-limitations-on-the-use-of-navigable-airspace .
^{66} The A4A cost estimate can be found in their November 10, 2025 press release at https://www.airlines.org/news-update/new-data-shows-huge-impact-of-the-government-shutdown-on-airlines-and-our-customers/ .
^{67} The part 129 foreign carrier totals for this fleet only include operators and aircraft that have had at least one U.S. operation in the 17-month period from April 1, 2024, to September 1, 2025.
^{68} Speech: “Downward Pressure on the Accident Rate”. Nicholas A. Sabatini. International Society of Air Safety Investigators. May 12, 2006. Retrieved September 2025 from China Aviation Daily. http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/0/456.html .
^{69} Transport and commuter category airplane costs are found in the associated final rule for Airworthiness Directive; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes (05/26/2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplanes .
^{70} Rotorcraft costs are found in the associated final rule for Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters (12/09/21) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/09/2021-26779/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters .
^{71} The 10,341 RA units for aircraft operating under part 129 do not include units that are covered under the second compliance deadline (786 airplane and 27 rotorcraft RAs).
^{72} This group consists of the 16,657 aircraft under part 91, 8,314 aircraft under part 135, and the 18 rotorcraft and 531 airplanes with less than 30 passenger seats or 7,500 lbs. cargo capacity under part 129.
^{73} The IBA estimate is found at https://www.iba.aero/resources/articles/the-direct-cost-of-grounding-the-boeing-737-max-8-fleet/ .
^{74} The 2010 Total Delay Impact Study can be found at https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/6234 .
^{75} The BLS CPI-U values can be found at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0 .
^{76} New ADs to address Upper C-band RA interference would likely align with current ADs addressing Lower C-band interference and would prohibit operating Boeing 777s and 747-8s, making up 295 of the 8,014 airplanes operating under part 121 and 1,100 out of 5,050 operating under part 129, with the potential for issuance of further ADs covering additional models.
^{77} Information on NAICS can be found at https://www.census.gov/naics/ .
^{78} Transport and commuter category airplane costs are found in the associated final rule for Airworthiness Directive; Transport and Commuter Category Airplanes (05/26/2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/26/2023-11371/airworthiness-directives-transport-and-commuter-category-airplane and rotorcraft costs are found in the associated final rule for Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters (12/09/21) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/09/2021-26779/airworthiness-directives-various-helicopters .
^{79} The 2022 U.S. SUSB files can be found at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2022/econ/susb/2022-susb-annual.html .
^{80} 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
^{81} FAA Order No. 1210.20 (Jan.28, 2004), available at www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf .
^{82} In the Matter of Upper C-band (3.98-4.2 GHz), 90 FR 56076 (proposed December 5, 2025) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/05/2025-22020/in-the-matter-of-upper-c-band-398-42-ghz .

List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 91
Air carriers, Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 121
Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
14 CFR Part 129
Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety.

The Proposed Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534; Pub. L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C. 44703 note); Sec. 828 of Pub. L. 118-63, 138 Stat. 1330 (49 U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
2. Add § 91.220 to read as follows:
§ 91.220
Radio Altimeter Systems
(a) After [two years after the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of paragraph (b).
(b) The radio altimeter system must operate at an altitude of 0-500 feet above ground level in the interference environment defined in table 1:
Table 1
Frequency range (MHz) | Power flux-density, single polarization, RMS (dBW/m ^2 /MHz)
3000 ≤ f < 4000 | 9.5
4000 ≤ f < 4100 | 9.5
4100 ≤ f < 4150 | 9.5
4150 ≤ f < 4160 | 6.5
4160 ≤ f < 4180 | −1
4180 ≤ f < 4190 | −17
4190 ≤ f < 4200 | −34
4200 ≤ f ≤ 4400 | −82
4400 < f ≤ 4410 | −33
4410 < f ≤ 4430 | −21
4430 < f ≤ 4440 | −8
4440 < f ≤ 4450 | −1
4450 < f ≤ 4460 | 6.5
4460 < f ≤ 4500 | 9.5
4500 < f ≤ 4600 | 9.5
4600 < f ≤ 5600 | 9.5

PART 121—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
3. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40103, 40113, 40119, 41706, 42301 preceding note added by Pub. L. 112-95, sec. 412, 126 Stat. 89, 44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44729, 44732; 46105; Pub. L. 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 note); Pub. L. 115-254, 132 Stat. 3186 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note).
4. Add § 121.326 to read as follows:
§ 121.326
Radio Altimeter Systems
After [the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.

PART 129—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
5. The authority citation for part 129 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
49 U.S.C. 1372, 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901-44904, 44906, 44912, 46105, Pub. L. 107-71 sec. 104.
6. Add § 129.16 to read as follows:
§ 129.16
Radio Altimeter Systems
(a) After [the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.
(b) After [two years after the initial RA performance deadline], no person may operate an aircraft under this part in the airspace of the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia with a radio altimeter unless the radio altimeter system meets the performance requirements of § 91.220(b) of this chapter.
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a), in Washington, DC.
Hugh J. Thomas,

Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2025-1105]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; West of Cyril E. King Airport, St. Thomas, VI

AGENCY:
Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:
The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a safety zone for certain navigable waters west of Cyril E. King Airport in St. Thomas, USVI. The safety zone is needed protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the proximity of the low flying aircrafts to vessels in the vicinity of the waters off the Cyril E. King Airport in St. Thomas, USVI. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector San Juan. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES:
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
To submit comments and view available documents, go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for USCG-2025-1105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
If you have questions about this proposed rule, contact Lieutenant Commander Rachel E. Thomas, Sector San Juan, Waterways Management Division Chief, Coast Guard; telephone (571) 613-1417, email Rachel.E.Thomas@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background and Authority
On August 25, 2025, the Coast Guard established a temporary final rule establishing a safety zone for the runway of Cyril E. King Airport in St. Thomas, USVI. ^1 The Coast Guard originally published the temporary final rule to be effective through September 30, 2025, then the Coast Guard established a temporary interim rule that extended the safety zone until December 31, 2025. ^2 This NPRM provides an opportunity for comment before a permanent safety zone is established. Therefore, the COTP is proposing this rule under the authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034, which is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
^1 90 FR 41301.
^2 90 FR 52565.

III. Discussion of the Rule
This proposed rule would establish a safety zone because there is an immediate need to mitigate the risk of vessels transiting between private port authority managed yellow buoys & the end of the St. Thomas Cyril E. King runway because of their proximity to the low flying aircrafts. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within 400 yards from shore directly west of the airport's runway within the two private port authority managed yellow buoys located at 18°20.288′ N-64°59.343′ W and 18°20.116′ N-64°59.343′ W. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or their designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders.

A. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the rulemaking is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this regulated area. This regulation will only impact navigable waters within 400 yards from shore directly west of the airport's runway within the two private port authority managed yellow buoys. In addition, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Marines via VHF FM marine channel 16, which will allow small entities to adjust their transit plans, and the rule allows vessels to request permission to enter the regulated area from the COTP.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), if this proposed rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions, contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Small businesses may send comments to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards by calling 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).

B. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

C. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in that Order.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
As required by The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538), the Coast Guard certifies that this proposed rule will not result in an annual expenditure of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector.

E. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This proposed rule involves safety zone that will prohibit entry within 400 yards from shore directly west of the airport's runway within the two private port authority managed yellow buoys. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2025-1105 in the search box and click “Search.” Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in the docket. To view available documents, find the docket as described in the previous paragraph, and then select “Supporting & Related Material” in the Document Type column. We will post public comments in our online docket. Additional information is on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

Authority:
46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.4.
2. Add § 165.793 to read as follows:
§ 165.793
Safety Zone; West of Cyril E. King Airport, St. Thomas, VI
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters within 400 yards from shore directly west of the airport's runway within the two private port authority managed yellow buoys located at 18°20.288′ N-64°59.343′ W and 18°20.116′ N-64°59.343′ W.
(b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Sector San Juan (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's representative by telephone at (787) 289-2041, or a designated representative via VHF-FM radio on channel 16 to request authorization. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
(d) Enforcement. (1) The regulation described in paragraph (a) will be enforced at all times.
(2) The COTP may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.
Luis J. Rodríguez,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Juan.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 257
[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2025-2864; FRL-12968-03-OLEM]
RIN 2050-AH42
Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Extension of an Alternative Closure Requirement Deadline; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:
Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

SUMMARY:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is extending the comment period for the proposed rule entitled “Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Extension of an Alternative Closure Requirement Deadline.” EPA is extending the comment period until February 6, 2026, in response to stakeholders' requests for a comment period extension.

DATES:
The comment period for the proposed rule published on November 28, 2025 (90 FR 54611) was originally scheduled to close on January 7, 2026, but the comment period is being extended by 30 days. Comments must be received on or before February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2025-2864, online at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the detailed online instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register document published on November 28, 2025 (90 FR 54611). Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional instruction on commenting and visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Wise, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Waste Identification, Notice, and Generators Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, MC: 5304T, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 566-0520; email address: wise.patrick@epa.gov, or Frank Behan, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Waste Identification, Notice, and Generators Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, MC: 5304T, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 566-0531; email address: behan.frank@epa.gov. For more information on this rulemaking please visit https://www.epa.gov/coal-combustion-residuals.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On November 28, 2025, EPA published a proposed rule (90 FR 54611) entitled “Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Extension of an Alternative Closure Requirement Deadline.” The original deadline to submit comments was January 7, 2026. On December 5, 2025 and December 8, 2025, EPA received requests for the Agency to extend the comment period.
In response to the request for a comment period extension, this action extends the comment period of the proposed rule by 30 days. Written comments must now be received by February 6, 2026.
EPA previously announced that it will hold a virtual public hearing beginning at 9 a.m. Eastern Time on January 6, 2026 (90 FR 54611). This action does not affect the timing of the virtual public hearing. Nonetheless, the public is encouraged to monitor EPA's website ( https://www.epa.gov/coal-combustion-residuals ) to determine if there are any relevant announcements or changes related to the hearing.
To submit comments or access the docket, please follow the detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register document published on November 28, 2025 (90 FR 54611). Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted as they are already incorporated into the public record and will be considered in the final action as appropriate. If you have questions, consult the people listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .
John W. Busterud,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency Management.
91
4
Wednesday, January 7, 2026
Notices
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are required regarding; whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments regarding this information collection received by February 6, 2026 will be considered. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Farm Service Agency
Title: Direct Loan Making.
OMB Control Number: 0560-0237.
Summary of Collection: The Farm Loan Program (FLP) in the Farm Service Agency (FSA) provides loans to family farmers to purchase real estate and equipment and finance agricultural production. The regulation as specified in 7 CFR 764 covered by this collection describes the policies and procedures the agency uses to provide supervised credit to FLP applicants requesting direct loan assistance in accordance with the provisions of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (CONTACT) (Pub. L. 87-128), as amended. Direct loan making information collection requirements include financial and production records of the operation, as well as information necessary to obtain liens on collateral, providing evidence of indebtedness, and ensure repayment of the loan. FSA will use several forms and non-forms to collect the information.
Need and Use of the Information: Information is submitted by the applicants to the local agency office serving the county in which their business is headquartered. The information is necessary to thoroughly evaluate the applicant's request for a direct loan and is used by agency officials to: (1) Ensure that cash flow projections used in determining loan repayment are based on the actual production history of the operation, (2) Ensure that a loan is adequately secured; (3) Ensure the applicant meets the statutorily established program eligibility requirements; and (4) Obtain assignment on income or sales proceeds, when appropriate, to ensure timely repayment of the loans.
Since the agency is mandated to provide supervised credit, failure to collect the information, or collecting it less frequently, could result in the failure of the farm operation or loss of agency security property.
Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profit; Farms.
Number of Respondents: 202,013.
Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion; Annually.
Total Burden Hours: 336,908.
Levi S. Harrell,

Departmental Collection Clearance Officer.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2025-0035]
Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Restricted, Prohibited, and Controlled Importation of Animal and Poultry Products and Byproducts Into the United States

AGENCY:
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION:
Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with the restricted, prohibited, and controlled importation of animal and poultry products and byproducts into the United States.

DATES:
We will consider all comments that we receive on or before March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov. Enter APHIS-2025-0035 in the Search field. Select the Documents tab, then select the Comment button in the list of documents.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2025-0035, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., #AP760, Beltsville, MD 20705.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at regulations.gov or in our reading room, which is located in Room 1620 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For information on prohibited, restricted, and controlled importation of animal and poultry products and byproducts into the United States, contact the following individuals: For issues concerning meat, milk, eggs, and casings, Dr. Nathaniel Koval, Senior Staff Officer, Animal Product Imports, Strategy and Policy, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705, (301) 851-3300, nathaniel.j.koval@usda.gov. For issues concerning all other byproducts, Dr. David Pasnik, Senior Staff Officer, Animal Product Imports, Strategy and Policy, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705, (301) 851-3300, david.j.pasnik@usda.gov.
For more information on the information collection reporting process, contact Ms. Sheniqua Harris, APHIS' Paperwork Reduction Act Coordinator, at (301) 851-2528; APHIS.PRA@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Restricted, Prohibited, and Controlled Importation of Animal and Poultry Products and Byproducts into the United States.
OMB Control Number: 0579-0015.
Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.
Abstract: The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA) of 2002 gives the Secretary of Agriculture broad authority to detect, control, or eradicate pests or diseases of livestock or poultry. The Secretary may also prohibit or restrict import or export of any animal or related material if necessary to prevent the spread of any livestock or poultry pest or disease. The AHPA is contained in title X, subtitle E, sections 10401-18 of Public Law 107-171, May 13, 2002, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.
Disease prevention is the most effective method for maintaining a healthy animal population and for enhancing the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's (APHIS') ability to compete globally in animal and animal product and byproduct trade. In connection with this mission, APHIS enforces regulations regarding both the importation of controlled materials and the prevention of foreign animal disease incursions into the United States. These regulations are located in 9 CFR parts 94, 95, and 122.
APHIS engages in a number of information collection activities to prevent or control the spread of livestock diseases via the restricted, prohibited, and controlled importation of animal and poultry products and byproducts into the United States, including, but not limited to, certificates, applications, agreements, appeals and cancellations of agreements, placards and statements, permissions to import, notifications, government seals, and marking requirements.
We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years. APHIS has amended this collection in the following ways:
• APHIS has combined all uses of the VS Form 16-3 from this collection into a universal “common forms” permit package. Uses of this form were formerly spread over four different collection packages, including this one. Removing the activities using VS Form 16-3 from this collection removed 5,106 respondents, 9,896 responses, and 11,695 burden hours from this collection.
• APHIS also included the activities under 9 CFR 94.12(c) for pork-filled pasta products, which were previously in their own information collection (0579-0214), to this collection, adding ten respondents, 50 responses, and 50 burden hours to this collection.
The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Estimate of burden: The public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.87 hours per response.
Respondents: Importers, exporters, processing operators, foreign federal governments, foreign veterinarians, port personnel, museums, educational institutions, transportation operators, and carrier personnel.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 25,806.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 2.
Estimated annual number of responses: 54,459.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 101,609 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.
Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of January 2026.
Michael Watson,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2025-0705]
Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Animal Disease Traceability

AGENCY:
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION:
Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with animal disease traceability.

DATES:
We will consider all comments that we receive on or before March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Enter APHIS-2025-0705 in the Search field. Select the Documents tab, then select the Comment button in the list of documents.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2025-0705, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., #AP760, Beltsville, MD 20705.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov or in our reading room, which is in Room 1620 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For information on animal disease traceability, contact Dr. Wendy Lehman, Veterinary Medical Officer, National Animal Disease Traceability and Veterinary Accreditation Center, Strategy and Policy, VS, APHIS, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705; (937) 999-7874. For more information on the information collection reporting process, contact Ms. Sheniqua Harris, APHIS' Paperwork Reduction Act Coordinator, at (301) 851-2528; or email: APHIS.PRA@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Animal Disease Traceability.
OMB Control Number: 0579-0327.
Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.
Abstract: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq. ), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is authorized, among other things, to prevent the introduction into and the dissemination within the United States of any pest or disease of livestock or poultry.
Within APHIS, Veterinary Services (VS) safeguards U.S. animal health through a variety of activities, including disease control. One important part of disease control is animal disease traceability. Animal disease traceability provides the ability to document the movement history of an animal throughout its life. Knowing where diseased and at-risk animals have been and are located, as well as when they have been there, is indispensable during an emergency response and important for ongoing disease programs.
Epidemiologists use this information to determine the potential spread of a disease. In fact, having the ability to plot locations within a radius of an infected premises helps to determine the potential magnitude of a contagious disease and the resources needed to contain it. Furthermore, as diseases are controlled or eradicated, it is important to document areas, States, or regions of the country that are free from disease. Traceability helps APHIS determine those disease-free zones, thus enhancing the marketability of U.S. livestock.
The regulations for animal disease traceability are located in 9 CFR part 86. Under the regulations, unless specifically exempted, livestock moved interstate must be officially identified and accompanied by an interstate certificate of veterinary inspection or other documentation. The regulations specify approved forms of official identification for each species but allow livestock to be moved between any two States or Tribes with another form of identification as agreed upon by animal health officials in the two jurisdictions. This identification requirement improves APHIS' ability to trace livestock if a disease is detected. Development and implementation of the animal disease traceability framework continues to be a partnership involving APHIS, States, Tribes, and industry. States and Tribes enter into cooperative agreements with APHIS to implement their traceability activities.
We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years. APHIS has amended this information collection due to the following:
• There is a decrease in the number of Respondents reporting, the number of Responses, and Total Burden Hours reported for the collection.
• APHIS removed the use of State figures for Approval of Official ID Devices.
• APHIS removed the use and recordkeeping of the VS Form 1-64 for State respondents.
The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.566 hours per response.
Respondents: State, Tribal, and territorial animal health officials; accredited veterinarians; breed and registry associations; producers; livestock market operators; and harvest facility employees.
Estimated annual number of respondents: 80,302.
Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 12.
Estimated annual number of responses: 947,082.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 536,091 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.
Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of January 2026.
Michael Watson,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection Activities: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): A Review of Major Changes in Program Design and Management Evaluation Systems

AGENCY:
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on this proposed information collection. This is a revision of a currently approved collection. This information collection is associated with State agencies' notification and data collection activities associated with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program review of major changes in program design at the State level.

DATES:
Written comments must be received on or before March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Comments may be sent to: Sasha Gersten-Paal, Director, Program Development Division, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1320 Braddock Place, 5th Floor, Alexandria, VA 22314. Comments may also be submitted via email to sasha.gersten-paal@usda.gov. Comments will also be accepted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will be a matter of public record.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or copies of this information collection should be directed to Sasha Gersten-Paal at 703-305-2507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Title: A Review of Major Changes in Program Design and Management Evaluation Systems.
Form Number: N/A.
OMB Control Number: 0584-0579.
Expiration Date: 5/31/2026.
Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Abstract: Section 11 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) (7 U.S.C. 2020), as amended, requires the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) to develop standards for identifying major changes in the operations of State agencies that administer SNAP. Regulations at 7 CFR 272.15 require State agencies to notify the FNS when planning to implement a major change in operations and to collect any information required by FNS to identify and correct any adverse effects on program integrity or access. 7 CFR 272.15(a)(2) outlines the categories of major changes to include: the closure of a local office, substantial increased reliance on automated systems, changes in operations that potentially increase difficulty for household reporting, the reduction or change of functions or responsibilities assigned to merit system personnel, a decrease in the number of merit system personnel involved in the SNAP certification process, or other major changes identified by FNS.
FNS is requesting to increase the burden estimates to account for increased reliance on automated systems, such as robotic process automation (RPA) or bots as a result of FNS' January 10, 2024, guidance on the use of advanced automation in SNAP. FNS is also requesting to increase burden estimates to account for State agencies implementing major changes in non-merit personnel, in response to FNS' March 20, 2024, clarification of guidance on the use of non-merit personnel in the administration of SNAP. Compared to prior collections, there is a noticeable rise in reports of major changes involving the use of non-merit personnel and automated systems, such as robotic process automation (RPA) or bots in SNAP administration. Recent patterns show an increase in the number of State agencies implementing major changes and an increase in the frequency of submissions per State agency. The frequency and timing of major changes to program operations remain with individual State agencies. State agencies make such changes in operations based upon a variety of interrelated factors.
Prior to any major change to State operations, regulations at 7 CFR 272.15(a)(3) require State agencies to provide FNS with descriptive information regarding the major change and an analysis of its projected impact on program operations. In an effort to reduce the burden of this collection, FNS provides a template for State agencies to submit notification of major changes in SNAP design electronically through the Waiver Information Management System (WIMS).
FNS reviews State notifications to determine if the described changes in program operations meet the criteria at 272.15(b). Some State notifications do not meet the major change criteria outlined in regulation. However, if FNS determines the notification meets the major change criteria, regulations at 7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)-(6) require State agencies to collect and report monthly State-level data on application processing metrics, listed at 7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)(i)-(xvii). Although the data is generally State level, it may be more targeted. 7 CFR 272.15(b)(4) in part, specifies, “while the data elements outlined in paragraph (b)(2) of this section will generally be required to be reported on a statewide basis and at a sub-state level, major changes that are limited to localized areas, such as a county or project area, may only require reporting”.
State submissions of the reports are required beginning with the quarter prior to pilot/implementation of the major change continuing for one year after full implementation. 7 CFR 272.15(b)(2) in part, necessitates “data must be reported separately for households with elderly and/or disabled members”. All required data reporting related to the implementation of the major change in program design must be disaggregated to show separate results for households that include an elderly and/or disabled member. This separation ensures that FNS can assess the impact of the program change on vulnerable households.
When a State agency implements a major change that allows households to report changes or apply or reapply for SNAP through the use of a call center, 7 CFR 272.15(b)(4)(iv) requires the collection of specific information related to customer service impacts. This information must be submitted to FNS on a quarterly basis. FNS may require pilot data and statewide impact data for one year following full implementation. State agencies meet this requirement by submitting the information electronically via WIMS. In an effort to reduce the reporting burden, FNS provides standardized templates to facilitate the collection and submission of the required information.
Regulations at 272.15(b)(4) give FNS the authority to request additional data beyond the mandatory data reporting elements outlined at 272.15(b)(1)-(3). Depending on the nature of the major change, State agencies may be required to report more specific or timely information concerning impacts on payment accuracy, which may include additional caseload data focused on households with particular characteristics. FNS will collaborate with State agencies to determine what additional information is practicable and will require only the data that is necessary to evaluate the impact of the major change. FNS uses the data reported under these provisions to provide technical assistance, as needed, monitor the impact of State agency changes, and identify compliance or performance issues early.
7 CFR 272.15(a)(3) Initial analysis of major changes: Based upon FNS's experience over the last three years of the 53 State agencies affected by this data collection, an estimated 20 State agencies will notify FNS of two major changes annually and provide analysis of the projected impact. Assuming an average of two major changes per State agency per year, this results in approximately 40 initial annual analysis responses. At an estimated 60 hours per initial response, the total annual burden for this activity is 2,400 burden hours.
7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)-(3) Reports required without additional data collection: If FNS determines the State's notification qualifies as a major change, State agencies must submit quarterly reports to FNS that include the mandatory reporting elements outlined in 7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)-(3) and may be subject to additional requirements depending on the nature of the change. FNS projects that 33 of the 40 major change notifications expected each year would qualify as major changes in program design, thereby triggering mandatory quarterly reporting. All 33 of these major changes will require State agencies to collect and report data to FNS as specified in 7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)-(3). FNS estimates 20 (non-duplicated respondents) State agencies will submit reports for each of the 33 major changes on a quarterly basis, resulting in 132 annual responses. Some reprogramming of the State's SNAP eligibility system is expected to facilitate the production of the quarterly reports. Each report is estimated to require 70 hours of effort. The total annual burden for this activity is 9,240 hours.
7 CFR 272.15(b)(4)(iv) Impact of certain major changes on customer service: States that notify FNS of major changes related to SNAP call center operations must also collect and submit additional customer service-related data. FNS projects that 8 of the 33 major changes would require the State agency to provide customer service-related data. Therefore, FNS estimates 8 State agencies will submit this report quarterly for a total of 4 responses/reports annually, totaling 32 annual responses. At an estimated 50 hours per report, the total annual burden for this activity is 1,600 hours.
7 CFR 272.15(b)(4) Reports required with additional data collection: FNS estimates that one State agency will be required to report additional data on a quarterly basis for a total of 4 annual responses/reports. At an estimated 70 hours per report, the total annual burden for this activity is 280 hours.
FNS estimates that 20 State agencies will report a total of 40 major changes. Thirty-three of the 40 will qualify as major changes in SNAP design. Based on the required quarterly reporting, FNS estimates 132 responses for major changes, an additional 32 customer service-related responses for States with call center operations, and 4 responses for States required to submit additional data, State agencies will submit a total of 208 total annual responses. Considering 2,400 hours for States to notify FNS of major changes in SNAP design, the 9,240 hours for reports required without additional data, 1,600 hours for reports that contain call center operations, and 280 hours for reports required with additional data are added, the total for the 20 State agencies is 13,520 total annual burden hours.
Additional information: The previously approved collection is titled “Major Changes in Program Design and Management Evaluations”; however, the most appropriate title is “Major Changes in Program Design”. Since management evaluation information is not collected under this request, the change in the title captures the nature of the information collection request. Management evaluation data is collected under OMB control number 0584-0010, expiration 8/31/2026. The previously approved collection included 13 respondents (State agencies), 85 responses (Appendices C through E and additional collection), and 8,860 annual burden hours. FNS estimates the revised burden includes 20 respondents (State agencies), 208 responses (Appendices C through E and additional collection), and 13,520 total annual burden hours. The revision in burden hours is based on an expected increased number of respondents from 13 to 20 and frequency in responses from one to two. The number of responses to mandatory quarterly reporting increased from 32 annual responses to 132 annual responses, the number of responses to quarterly reporting for call center modifications increased from 20 responses to 32 annual responses, and the number of responses for reporting in addition to mandatory reports decreased from 20 annual responses to 4 annual responses. The overall total annual burden hours have increased from 8,860 to 13,520. FNS is requesting to increase the burden estimates to account for increases in State agencies implementing major changes in non-merit personnel, in response to FNS' March 20, 2024, clarification of guidance on the use of non-merit personnel in the administration of SNAP. State agencies also increased reliance on automated systems, such as robotic process automation (RPA) or bots as a result of FNS' January 10, 2024, guidance on the use of advanced automation in SNAP. Additional data collection on advanced automation is necessary to identify and correct any adverse effect on program integrity or access including access by vulnerable households.
This information collection does not contain burden associated with record keeping and/or third-party public disclosures.

Summary of Burden Hours

Reporting
Affected Public: State agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 20. An average of 20 State agencies notify FNS of major change in SNAP design per year. This represents an increase from the previous information collection based on recent trends and focuses on innovative and modernized systems.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 10. This represents an increase from the previous information collection based on recent trends and focuses on non-merit staff use, innovative and modernized systems.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 208. This represents an increase from the previous information collection based on recent trends.
Estimated Time per Response: 65. State agencies have not reported changes to the estimated time per response since the last review. However, the number of responses with additional data reporting decreased, therefore, the estimated time per response decreased to 65 hours per response.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 13,520.
Respondent category (affected public) | Type of respondents (optional) | Burden activity | Forms/instruments (optional column) | CFR citation (optional column) | Estimated number of respondents | Responses per respondent (Col. H/F) | Total annual responses (Col. F × G) | Estimated hours per response (Col. J/H) | Estimated total burden hours (Col. H × I)
State Government | State, Local, and Tribal Governments | Major Change | Major Changes Notification Template | 7 CFR 272.15(a)(3) | 20 | 2 | 40 | 60 | 2,400
| | | | Major Changes Quarterly Reporting Template (Appendix D) | 7 CFR 272.15(b)(1)-(3) | 33 | 4 | 132 | 70 | 9,240
| | | Major Changes Quarterly Reporting Template for Call Center Modifications | 7 CFR 272.15(b)(4)(iv) | 8 | 4 | 32 | 50 | 1,600
| | | | 7 CFR 272.15(b)(4) | 1 | 4 | 4 | 70 | 280
State Government Sub-Total | State Agency Subtotal Reporting | 20 | 10 | 208 | 65 | 13,520
Patrick A. Penn,

Acting Administrator, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-933]
Hexamethylenetetramine From India: Countervailing Duty Order

AGENCY:
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY:
Based on affirmative final determinations by the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing a countervailing duty (CVD) order on hexamethylenetetramine (hexamine) from India.

DATES:
Applicable January 7, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0410.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background
In accordance with sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on September 23, 2025, Commerce published its affirmative final determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of hexamine from India. ^1
^1 See Hexamethylenetetramine from India: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 90 FR 45720 (September 23, 2025).
On December 22, 2025, pursuant to section 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final affirmative determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of hexamine from India within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act. ^2
^2 See ITC's Letter, “Notification of ITC Final Determination,” dated December 22, 2025 (ITC Notification Letter).

Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is hexamine from India. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the Appendix to this notice.

Order
As stated above, based on the ITC's final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of subsidized imports of hexamine from India, ^3 in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, Commerce is issuing this CVD order. Moreover, because the ITC determined that imports of hexamine from India are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of subject merchandise from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, are subject to the assessment of countervailing duties.
^3 Id.
Therefore, in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, Commerce intends to direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instructions by Commerce, countervailing duties on all relevant entries of hexamine from India, which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 7, 2025, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination, but will not include entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before the publication of the ITC's final injury determination under section 705(b) of the Act, as further described in the “Provisional Measures” section of this notice. ^4 Furthermore, in accordance with section 705(c)(4)(B) of the Act, for all companies for which we made an affirmative determination of critical circumstances, we will direct CBP to suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after December 7, 2024, which is 90 days prior to the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register .
^4 See Hexamethylenetetramine from India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 90 FR 11512 (March 7, 2025) ( Preliminary Determination ).

Suspension of Liquidation and Cash Deposits
In accordance with section 706 of the Act, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation of hexamine from India, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination in the Federal Register , and to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, countervailing duties on each entry of subject merchandise in an amount based on the net countervailable subsidy rates below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.
Commerce also intends, pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, to instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register , CBP must require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated customs duties on this merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the rates listed in the table below. The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed below, as appropriate.

Estimated Countervailing Duty Subsidy Rates
The estimated countervailing duty subsidy rates are as follows:
^5 Commerce found the following company to be cross-owned with Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Limited: Vardhan Limited.
Company | Subsidy rate (percent ad valorem )
Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Limited ^5 | 2.34
Horizon Chemicals | * 139.57
Micro Labs Ltd | * 139.57
Shreenathji Rasayan Private Limited | * 139.57
Rajsha Chemicals Pvt. Ltd | * 139.57
All Others | 2.34
* This rate is based on facts available with adverse inferences.

Provisional Measures
Section 703(d) of the Act states that the suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. Commerce published the Preliminary Determination on March 7, 2025. ^6 As such, the four-month period beginning on the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination ended on July 4, 2025.
^6 See Preliminary Determination.
In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, unliquidated entries of hexamine from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after July 5, 2024, the date on which the provisional measures expired, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation and the collection of cash deposits will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's affirmative final injury determination in the Federal Register .

Establishment of the Annual Inquiry Service Lists
On September 20, 2021, Commerce published the Final Rule in the Federal Register . ^7 On September 27, 2021, Commerce also published the Procedural Guidance in the Federal Register . ^8 The Final Rule and Procedural Guidance provide that Commerce will maintain an annual inquiry service list for each order or suspended investigation, and any interested party submitting a scope ruling application or request for circumvention inquiry shall serve a copy of the application or request on the persons on the annual inquiry service list for that order, as well as any companion order covering the same merchandise from the same country of origin.
^7 See Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws, 86 FR 52300 (September 20, 2021) ( Final Rule ).
^8 See Scope Ruling Application; Annual Inquiry Service List; and Informational Sessions, 86 FR 53205 (September 27, 2021) ( Procedural Guidance ).
In accordance with the Procedural Guidance, for orders published in the Federal Register after November 4, 2021, Commerce will create an annual inquiry service list segment in Commerce's online e-filing and document management system, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Electronic Service System (ACCESS), available at https://access.trade.gov, within five business days of publication of the notice of the order. Each annual inquiry service list will be saved in ACCESS, under each case number, and under a specific segment type called “AISL—Annual Inquiry Service List.” ^9
^9 This segment will be combined with the ACCESS Segment Specific Information (SSI) field which will display the month in which the notice of the order or suspended investigation was published in the Federal Register , also known as the anniversary month. For example, for an order under case number A-000-000 that was published in the Federal Register in January, the relevant segment and SSI combination will appear in ACCESS as “AISL—January Anniversary.” Note that there will be only one annual inquiry service list segment per case number, and the anniversary month will be pre-populated in ACCESS.
Interested parties who wish to be added to the annual inquiry service list for an order must submit an entry of appearance to the annual inquiry service list segment for the order in ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of the order. For ease of administration, Commerce requests that law firms with more than one attorney representing interested parties in an order designate a lead attorney to be included on the annual inquiry service list. Commerce will finalize the annual inquiry service list within five business days thereafter. As mentioned in the Procedural Guidance, ^{10} the new annual inquiry service list will be in place until the following year, when the Opportunity Notice for the anniversary month of the order is published.
^{10} See Procedural Guidance, 86 FR at 53206.
Commerce may update an annual inquiry service list at any time as needed based on interested parties' amendments to their entries of appearance to remove or otherwise modify their list of members and representatives, or to update contact information. Any changes or announcements pertaining to these procedures will be posted to the ACCESS website.

Special Instructions for Petitioner and Foreign Governments
In the Final Rule, Commerce stated that, “after an initial request and placement on the annual inquiry service list, both petitioners and foreign governments will automatically be placed on the annual inquiry service list in the years that follow.” ^{11} Accordingly, as stated above, the petitioner and the Government of India (GOI) should submit their initial entries of appearance after publication of this notice in order to appear in the first annual inquiry service list for this order. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(n)(3), the petitioner and the GOI will not need to resubmit their entries of appearance each year to continue to be included on the annual inquiry service list. However, the petitioner and the GOI are responsible for making amendments to their entries of appearance during the annual update to the annual inquiry service list in accordance with the procedures described above.
^{11} See Final Rule, 86 FR at 52335.

Notification to Interested Parties
This notice constitutes the CVD order with respect to hexamine from India, pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping and CVD orders currently in effect at https://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html .
This order is published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.211(b).
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Christopher Abbott,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Order
The scope of this order covers hexamine in granular form, with a particle size of 5 millimeters or less, whether stabilized or unstabilized, whether or not blended, mixed, pulverized, or grounded with other products, containing 50 percent or more hexamine by weight.
Hexamine is the common name for hexamethylene tetramine (Chemical Abstract Service #100-97-0), and is also referred to as 1,3,5,7-tetraazaadamantanemethenamine; HMT; HMTA; 1,3,5,7-tetraazatricyclo {3.3.1.13,7} decane; 1,3,5,7-tetraaza adamantane; hexamethylenamine. Hexamine has the chemical formula C6H12N4.
Granular hexamine that has been blended with other product(s) is included in this scope when the resulting mix contains 50 percent or more of hexamine by weight, regardless of whether it is blended with inert additives, co-reactants, or any additives that undergo self-condensation.
Subject merchandise includes merchandise matching the above description that has been processed in a third country, including by commingling, diluting, adding or removing additives, or performing any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of this order if performed in the subject country.
Merchandise covered by the scope of this order can be classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS) of the United States under the subheading 2933.69.5000. The HTSUS subheading and Chemical Abstracts Service registry number are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; however, the written description of the scope is dispositive.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-428-854, A-533-932, A-517-807]
Hexamethylenetetramine From the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Saudi Arabia): Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination; Hexamethylenetetramine From Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia: Antidumping Duty Orders

AGENCY:
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY:
Based on affirmative final determinations by the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing the antidumping duty (AD) orders on hexamethylenetetramine (hexamine) from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. Further, the ITC determined that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to hexamine from Germany and India. In addition, Commerce is amending its final determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) with respect to Hexamine from Saudi Arabia to correct ministerial errors.

DATES:
Applicable January 7, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria Papakostas (Germany) at (202) 482-0086; Dylan Hill (India) at (202) 482-1197; or Andrew Hart (Saudi Arabia) at (202) 482-1058, AD/CVD Operations, Offices II, IV, and IX, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background
On September 23, 2025, Commerce published its affirmative final determinations in the LTFV investigations of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia, in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). ^1 In the LTFV investigation of Hexamine from Saudi Arabia, interested parties timely alleged that Commerce made certain ministerial errors. See “Amendment to the Final Determination of Sales at LTFV for Saudi Arabia” section below for further discussion.
^1 See Hexamethylenetetramine from Germany: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 90 FR 45728 (September 23, 2025); see also Hexamethylenetetramine from India: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in part, 90 FR 45725 (September 23, 2025); and Hexamethylenetetramine from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 90 FR 45723 (September 23, 2025) ( Saudi Arabia Final Determination ).
On December 22, 2025, pursuant to section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final affirmative determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of dumped imports of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. ^2 On December 30, 2025, the ITC published its final determinations in the Federal Register . ^3 Further, the ITC determined that critical circumstances are not likely to undermine seriously the remedial effect of the antidumping duty orders on hexamine from Germany and India. ^4
^2 See ITC's Letter, “Notification of ITC Final Determination,” dated December 22, 2025 (ITC Notification Letter).
^3 See Hexamine (Hexamethylenetetramine) from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia; Determinations, 90 FR 61168 (December 30, 2025).
^4 Id.

Scope of the Orders
The products covered by these orders are hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. For a complete description of the scope of the orders, see the appendix to this notice.

Amendment to the Final Determination of Sales at LTFV for Saudi Arabia
We determine that we made a ministerial error in the final determination of sales at LTFV for Saudi Arabia. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), and as explained further in the Saudi Arabia Ministerial Error Memorandum, ^5 Commerce is amending the Saudi Arabia Final Determination to reflect the correction of a ministerial error. ^6 Correction of this error changes the final AD adjusted cash deposit rate for Methanol Chemicals Company, as well as the cash deposit rate for all other producers and exporters not individually investigated. The revised rates are listed in the “Estimated Weighted-Average Dumping Margins” section, below.
^5 See Memorandum, “Analysis of Ministerial Error Allegations,” dated December 29, 2025.
^6 Id.

AD Orders
Based on the above-referenced affirmative final determinations, in accordance with sections 735(c)(2) of the Act, Commerce is issuing these AD orders. Because the ITC determined that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from the countries, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.
Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise on all relevant entries of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. Antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of hexamine entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 6, 2025, the date of publication of the LFTV Preliminary Determinations, ^7 but will not include entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final injury determination, as further described below.
^7 See Hexamethylenetetramine from Germany: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional Measures, 90 FR 19186 (May 6, 2025); see also Hexamethylenetetramine From India: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 90 FR 19178 (May 6, 2025); Hexamethylenetetramine from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional Measures, 90 FR 19180 (May 6, 2025 (collectively, Preliminary Determinations ).

Suspension of Liquidation and Cash Deposits
In accordance with section 736 of the Act, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation and continue the suspension of liquidation, as applicable, on all relevant entries of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination in the Federal Register .
Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins indicated in the tables below, adjusted by the relevant subsidy offsets. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated customs duties on subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the rates listed in the tables below. The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed, as appropriate.

Critical Circumstances
With respect to the ITC's negative critical circumstances determination on imports of hexamine from Germany and India, we will instruct CBP to lift the suspension of liquidation and to refund all cash deposits for estimated antidumping duties with respect to entries of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 5, 2025, i.e., 90 days prior to the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determinations, but before May 6, 2025, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determinations.

Estimated Weighted-Average Dumping Margins
The estimated weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
^8 Adjusted for export subsidies of 1.99 percent (comprised of 1.19 percent for the duty drawback program, and 0.80 percent for the remissions of duties and taxes on export products program) for Kanoria and All Others. See Hexamethylenetetramine from India: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, In Part, 90 FR 45720 (September 23, 2025) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated September 18, 2025.
Germany
Exporter/producer | Weighted-average dumping margin (percent)
Prefere Paraform GmbH & Co Kg | 59.29
Fiberpipe GFK Vertriebsgesellschaft | * 102.14
All Others | 59.29
* Rate based on facts available with adverse inferences.
India
Exporter/producer | Weighted-average dumping margin (percent) | Cash deposit rate (adjusted for subsidy offset(s)) (percent)
Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Limited | 5.11 | ^8 3.12
Horizon Chemicals | * 105.76 | 103.77
Micro Labs Limited | * 105.76 | 103.77
Shreenathji Rasayan Private Limited | * 105.76 | 103.77
Rajsha Chemicals Pvt. Ltd | * 105.76 | 103.77
All Others | 5.11 | 3.12
* Rate based on facts available with adverse inferences.
Saudi Arabia
Exporter/producer | Weighted-average dumping margin (percent)
Methanol Chemicals Company | * 8.10
| All Others | 8.10
* Rate based on facts available with adverse inferences.

Provisional Measures
Section 773(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise request that Commerce extend the four-month period to no more than six months. At the request of exporters that account for a significant proportion of hexamine from Germany, Saudi Arabia, and India, Commerce extended the four-month period to six months. ^9
^9 See Preliminary Determinations.
In the underlying investigations, Commerce published the Preliminary Determinations on May 6, 2025. Therefore, the six-month period beginning on the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determinations ended on November 1, 2025. Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 2, 2025, the day on which the provisional AD measures expired, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determinations in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation and the collection of cash deposits will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determinations in the Federal Register .

Establishment of the Annual Inquiry Service Lists
On September 20, 2021, Commerce published the Final Rule in the Federal Register . ^{10} On September 27, 2021, Commerce also published the Procedural Guidance in the Federal Register . ^{11} The Final Rule and Procedural Guidance provide that Commerce will maintain an annual inquiry service list for each order or suspended investigation, and any interested party submitting a scope ruling application or request for circumvention inquiry shall serve a copy of the application or request on the persons on the annual inquiry service list for that order, as well as any companion order covering the same merchandise from the same country of origin.
^{10} See Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws, 86 FR 52300 (September 20, 2021) ( Final Rule ).
^{11} See Scope Ruling Application; Annual Inquiry Service List; and Informational Sessions, 86 FR 53205 (September 27, 2021) ( Procedural Guidance ).
In accordance with the Procedural Guidance, for orders published in the Federal Register after November 21, 2021, Commerce will create an annual inquiry service list segment in Commerce's online e-filing and document management system, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Electronic Service System (ACCESS), available at https://access.trade.gov, within five business days of publication of the notice of the order. Each annual inquiry service list will be saved in ACCESS, under each case number, and under a specific segment type called “AISL—Annual Inquiry Service List.” ^{12}
^{12} This segment will be combined with the ACCESS Segment Specific Information (SSI) field which will display the month in which the notice of the order or suspended investigation was published in the Federal Register , also known as the anniversary month. For example, for an order under case number A-000-000 that was published in the Federal Register in January, the relevant segment and SSI combination will appear in ACCESS as “AISL—January Anniversary.” Note that there will be only one annual inquiry service list segment per case number, and the anniversary month will be pre-populated in ACCESS.
Interested parties who wish to be added to the annual inquiry service list for an order must submit an entry of appearance to the annual inquiry service list segment for the order in ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of the order. For ease of administration, Commerce requests that law firms with more than one attorney representing interested parties in an order designate a lead attorney to be included on the annual inquiry service list. Commerce will finalize the annual inquiry service list within five business days thereafter. As mentioned in the Procedural Guidance, ^{13} the new annual inquiry service list will be in place until the following year, when the Opportunity Notice for the anniversary month of the order is published.
^{13} See Procedural Guidance, 86 FR at 53206.
Commerce may update an annual inquiry service list at any time as needed based on interested parties' amendments to their entries of appearance to remove or otherwise modify their list of members and representatives, or to update contact information. Any changes or announcements pertaining to these procedures will be posted to the ACCESS website.

Special Instructions for the Petitioner and Foreign Governments
In the Final Rule, Commerce stated that, “after an initial request and placement on the annual inquiry service list, both petitioners and foreign governments will automatically be placed on the annual inquiry service list in the years that follow.” ^{14} Accordingly, as stated above, the petitioner and foreign governments should submit their initial entries of appearance after publication of this notice in order to appear in the first annual inquiry service lists for these orders. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(n)(3), the petitioner and foreign governments will not need to resubmit their entries of appearance each year to continue to be included on the annual inquiry service list. However, the petitioner and foreign governments are responsible for making amendments to their entries of appearance during the annual update to the annual inquiry service list in accordance with the procedures described above.
^{14} See Final Rule, 86 FR at 52335.

Notification to Interested Parties
This notice constitutes the AD orders with respect to hexamine from Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia, pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of AD and countervailing duty orders currently in effect at https://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.
The amended Saudi Arabia final determination and these AD orders are published in accordance with sections 735(e) and 736(a) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.224(e), and 19 CFR 351.211(b).
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Christopher Abbott,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Orders
The scope covered by these orders include hexamine in granular form, with a particle size of 5 millimeters or less, whether stabilized or unstabilized, whether or not blended, mixed, pulverized, or grounded with other products, containing 50 percent or more hexamine by weight.
Hexamine is the common name for hexamethylene tetramine (Chemical Abstract Service #100-97-0), and is also referred to as 1,3,5,7-tetraazaadamantanemethenamine; HMT; HMTA; 1,3,5,7-tetraazatricyclo {3.3.1.13,7} decane; 1,3,5,7-tetraaza adamantane; hexamethylenamine. Hexamine has the chemical formula C 6 H 12 N 4 .
Granular hexamine that has been blended with other product(s) is included in this scope when the resulting mix contains 50 percent or more of hexamine by weight, regardless of whether it is blended with inert additives, co-reactants, or any additives that undergo self-condensation.
Subject merchandise includes merchandise matching the above description that has been processed in a third country, including by commingling, diluting, adding or removing additives, or performing any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of these orders if performed in the subject country.
Merchandise covered by the scope of these orders can be classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS) of the United States under the subheading 2933.69.5000. The HTSUS subheading and Chemical Abstracts Service registry number are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; however, the written description of the scope is dispositive.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee Meeting

AGENCY:
National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.

ACTION:
Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY:
Notice is hereby given of a virtual public meeting of the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee (IMDCC). IMDCC members will discuss Federal marine debris activities, with a particular emphasis on the topics identified in the section, Matters To Be Considered.

DATES:
The virtual public meeting will be held on January 29, 2026, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST).

ADDRESSES:
The meeting will be held virtually using Google Meet. You can connect to the meeting using the website or phone number provided:
Meeting link: https://meet.google.com/jct-mevc-wpv
Phone: (US) +1 631-260-1193 PIN: 887 629 280#
Attendance will be limited to the first 500 individuals to join the virtual meeting room. Refer to the IMDCC website at https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/our-work/IMDCC for the most up-to-date information on the agenda and instructions regarding how to participate.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sophia Maginnes, Communication Support Specialist, Marine Debris Program; Email Sophia.Maginnes@noaa.gov; Google Voice (301) 458-0362 or visit the IMDCC website at https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/our-work/IMDCC.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
The IMDCC is a multi-agency body responsible for coordinating a comprehensive program of marine debris research and activities among Federal agencies, in cooperation and coordination with non-governmental organizations, industry, academia, States, Tribes, and other nations, as appropriate. Representatives meet to share information, assess and promote best management practices, and coordinate the Federal Government's efforts to address marine debris.
The Marine Debris Act establishes the IMDCC (33 U.S.C. 1954). The IMDCC submits biennial progress reports to Congress with updates on activities, achievements, strategies, and recommendations. NOAA serves as the Chairperson of the IMDCC.
The meeting will be open to public attendance on January 29, 2026, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. EST. There will not be a public comment period. The meeting will not be recorded.

II. Matters To Be Considered
The open meeting will include a presentation from the NOAA Marine Debris Program on the launch of the new Abandoned and Derelict Vessel (ADV) National Database. The purpose of the database is to provide the public the opportunity to report ADVs, to help identify the scope of the problem, and track prevention and removal efforts. The agenda topics described are subject to change. The latest version of the agenda will be posted at https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/our-work/IMDCC.

III. Special Accommodations
The meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Closed captioning will be available. Requests for other auxiliary aids should be directed to Sophia Maginnes, at sophia.maginnes@noaa.gov or via Google Voice (301) 458-0362, by January 20, 2026.
Authority: The Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee (IMDCC) is established by the Marine Debris Act, 33 U.S.C. 1954, as amended.
Sean Corson,

Director, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science and Office of Response and Restoration, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
Consumer Credit Card Market Report of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2025

AGENCY:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

ACTION:
Consumer Credit Card Market Report of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

SUMMARY:
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is issuing its seventh biennial Consumer Credit Card Market Report to Congress. The report includes analysis of data from several sources to examine many aspects of the consumer credit card market since the Bureau's most recent biennial report on the same subject in 2023.

DATES:
The Bureau released the 2025 Consumer Credit Card Market Report on its website on December 30, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Martinez, Credit Card Program Manager, Division of Research, Monitoring, and Regulations at 202-435-7000 or daniel.martinez@cfpb.gov. If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact CFPB_Accessibility@cfpb.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Consumer Credit Card Market Report of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2025

1.1 Report Mandate
In May 2009, Congress passed the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act (CARD Act or Act). ^1 The CARD Act made substantial changes to the credit card market. Its stated purpose was to “establish fair and transparent practices related to the extension of credit” in the credit card marketplace. ^2 The Act mandated new disclosures and underwriting standards, curbed certain fees, and restricted certain interest rate increases on existing balances. ^3
^1 Public Law 111-24, 123 Stat. 1734 (2009).
^2 Id.
^3 A full summary of the CARD Act rules implemented by the Board is at pages 11 through 13 of the Bureau's 2013 Report. See Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Card Act Report, (Oct. 1, 2013) (2013 Report), http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201309_cfpb_card-act-report.pdf. The Bureau subsequently reissued these rules without material changes in December 2011. It has since amended the ability to pay rules and the fee harvester rules implemented by the Board. These later changes became effective in March and May 2013, respectively.
Among the CARD Act's many provisions was a requirement that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) report every two years “within the limits of its existing resources available for reporting purposes” on the consumer credit card market, including a number of specified topics. ^4 With the passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) in 2010, that requirement passed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) alongside broader responsibility for administering most of the CARD Act's provisions. This is the seventh report published pursuant to that obligation, building on prior reports published by the Bureau in 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2023. ^5
^4 15 U.S.C. 1616(a) (2012).
^5 See 2013 Report, supra note 3, http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201309_cfpb_card-act-report.pdf; CFPB, The Consumer Credit Card Market (Dec. 2015) (2015 Report), http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201512_cfpb_report-the-consumer-credit-card-market.pdf; CFPB, The Consumer Credit Card Market (Dec. 2017) (2017 Report), https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2017.pdf; CFPB, The Consumer Credit Card Market (Aug. 2019) (2019 Report), https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2019.pdf; CFPB, The Consumer Credit Card Market (Sept. 2021) (2021 Report), https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2021.pdf; CFPB, The Consumer Credit Card Market (Oct. 2023) (2023 Report), https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2023.pdf. The Bureau also held a conference in 2011 in which numerous market stakeholders contributed information and perspective on developments in the credit card market. See Press Release, CFPB, CFPB Launches Public Inquiry on the Impact of the CARD Act ( Dec. 19, 2012), https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-launches-public-inquiry-on-the-impact-of-the-card-act.

1.2 Publication
In addition to being delivered to Congress, the full report is available to the public on the Bureau's website at https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2025.pdf.

1.3 Summary of Report
The full 2025 report includes analysis of data from several sources to examine many aspects of the consumer credit card market as of the end of 2024. In addition to mandating the Bureau's biennial review and report on the market, the Act also requires the Bureau to “solicit comment from consumers, credit card issuers, and other interested parties” in connection with its review. ^6 As in past years, the Bureau has done so through a Request for Information (RFI) published in the Federal Register , and the Bureau discusses specific evidence or arguments provided by commenters throughout the report. ^7
^6 15 U.S.C. 1616(b) (2012).
^7 Request for Information Regarding Consumer Credit Card Market, 90 FR 5831 (Jan. 17, 2025), https://www.regulations.gov/document/CFPB-2025-0004-0001.
Continuing past practice, the 2025 report revisits most of the same baseline indicators as prior reports to track key market developments and trends. Below is a summary of the core findings of the report.
• Use of credit: Credit card debt at the end of 2024 exceeded $1.2 trillion. Purchase volume grew to $3.6 trillion in 2024, up from $3.2 trillion in 2022. The share of cardholders making only the minimum payment is at its highest since at least 2015. Delinquencies and charge-offs reached historically high levels in early 2024 but have since fallen to pre-pandemic levels.
• Cost of credit: In 2024, the average annual percentage rate (APR) reached 25.2 percent for general purpose cards and 31.3 percent for private label credit cards, the highest level since at least 2015. In 2024, consumers were assessed $160 billion in interest charges, up from $105 billion in 2022. This increase was driven by higher APRs, a 9.5 percent increase in cardholders, and an 18 percent increase in the average monthly credit card balance per cardholder.
• Credit card product innovation: The use of alternative data, such as bank account cash flow information, is helping to expand credit card access to consumers, particularly for those with limited credit history. AI is also accelerating the incidence and seriousness of payments-related fraud.
• Availability of credit: In 2024, U.S. consumers submitted over 153 million credit card applications, a decrease from applications exceeding 160 million in 2022 and 2023. New account originations declined 19 percent from 2022 to 89 million new accounts in 2024. Total credit line across all consumer credit cards increased to over $5.7 trillion.
• Disputes: In 2024, cardholders disputed $9.8 billion in credit card charges, resulting in $5.9 billion in chargebacks. For general purpose cards, the most common reason for a dispute is a cancelled recurring transaction, like subscriptions, membership fees, and utility bills, which made up 40 percent of all disputes.

1.4 Regulatory Agenda
The Bureau is not proposing any new or revised regulations related to consumer credit cards at this time because the Bureau currently is focusing on deregulation and reconsideration of rulemakings, as the Bureau has noted in its public rulemaking agenda.
Geoffrey C. Gradler,

Deputy Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Transmittal No. 24-48]
Arms Sales Notification; Correction

AGENCY:
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION:
Arms sales notice; correction.

SUMMARY:
On December 15, 2025, the DoD published a notice titled Arms Sales Notification. Subsequent to publication of the notice, the DoD realized that the wrong photographed page published in the notice. This correction reprints the photographed page in its entirety to include the correct page. All other information in the original notice remains the same.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Urooj Zahra at (703) 695-6233, urooj.zahra.civ@mail.mil, or dsca.ncr.rsrcmgmt.list.cns-mbx@mail.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In the Federal Register of December 15, 2025 (90 FR 57983-57986), in FR Doc. 2025-22709, on page 57984 immediately following the signature block in the second column, the photographed page is reprinted correctly as follows.
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Aaron T. Siegel,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Combined Notice of Filings
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings
Docket Numbers: RP26-340-000.
Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: 20251231 Negotiated Rate to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5290.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-341-000.
Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates—Various Releases eff 1-1-26 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5316.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-342-000.
Applicants: Trunkline Gas Company, LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: NRA Filing—Indiana Gas Co, Inc, d/b/a CenterPoint Energy Indiana North to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5321.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-343-000.
Applicants: Sabine Pipe Line LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreements—December 2025 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5325.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-344-000.
Applicants: Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: RP 2025-12-31 Negotiated Rate Agreements to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5385.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-345-000.
Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Capacity Release Eff 1.1.26 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5390.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-346-000.
Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Capacity Release Agreements—1/1/2026 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5085.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-347-000.
Applicants: Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Capacity Release Agreements—1/1/2026 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5095.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-348-000.
Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negiotated Rates—Brooklyn Union to NRG eff 1-1-26 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5117.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/26.
Docket Numbers: RP26-349-000.
Applicants: NEXUS Gas Transmission, LLC.
Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates—Various Releases eff 1-1-26 to be effective 1/1/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5131.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/26.
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system ( https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp ) by querying the docket number.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or OPP@ferc.gov.
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Combined Notice of Filings #1
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Docket Numbers: EG26-119-000.
Applicants: Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership.
Description: Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership submits Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5408.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: EG26-120-000.
Applicants: Apache Hill Energy Center, LLC.
Description: Apache Hill Energy Center, LLC submits Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5438.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Take notice that the Commission received the following Complaints and Compliance filings in EL Dockets:
Docket Numbers: EL26-37-000.
Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
Description: Petition for Declaratory Order of Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
Filed Date: 12/29/25.
Accession Number: 20251229-5528.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/28/26.
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
Docket Numbers: ER26-87-001.
Applicants: Chaves Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Chaves Energy Storage MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5411.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-88-001.
Applicants: High Majestic Wind Energy II, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to High Majestic Wind Energy II MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5397.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-89-001.
Applicants: Lorenzo Wind Energy, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Lorenzo Wind Energy MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5403.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-90-001.
Applicants: Minco Wind Energy IV, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Minco Wind Energy IV MBR Applicaiton to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5416.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-91-001.
Applicants: Palo Duro Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Palo Duro Energy Storage MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5419.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-92-002.
Applicants: Panhandle Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Panhandle Energy Storage MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5429.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-93-001.
Applicants: Lorenzo Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Lorenzo Energy Storage MBR Applicaiton to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5409.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-94-001.
Applicants: Pratt Wind Energy, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Pratt Wind Energy MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5420.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-95-001.
Applicants: Roswell Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Roswell Energy Storage MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5424.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-96-001.
Applicants: Webb Road Energy Storage, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Webb Road Energy Storage MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5426.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-97-001.
Applicants: Wildcat Ranch Wind Energy, LLC.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Wildcat Ranch Wind Energy MBR Application to be effective 12/10/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5427.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-933-000.
Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Jan 2025 Membership Filing to be effective 12/1/2025.
Filed Date: 12/31/25.
Accession Number: 20251231-5440.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/21/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-934-000.
Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: ATSI submits a new Construction Agmt—SA No. 7266 to be effective 3/4/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5042.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-935-000.
Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, Service Agreement No. 7792; AE1-079 to be effective 3/4/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5097.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-936-000.
Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Mississippi Power Company.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Alabama Power Company submits tariff filing per 35.15: Shy Place Solar Park (Solar & Battery) LGIA Termination Filing to be effective 1/2/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5108.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-937-000.
Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Mississippi Power Company.
Description: Tariff Amendment: Alabama Power Company submits tariff filing per 35.15: Centaurus Solar Amended and Restated LGIA Termination Filing to be effective 1/2/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5123.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-938-000.
Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Mississippi Power Company.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Alabama Power Company submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Georgia Power-Twiggs County Solar (Twiggs BESS) SISA Filing to be effective 12/23/2025.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5150.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-939-000.
Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ISA, SA No. 4055; Project Queue #Z2-082 to be effective 3/1/2024.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5179.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
Docket Numbers: ER26-940-000.
Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: SA 1022—EPC with Idaho Power to be effective 3/4/2026.
Filed Date: 1/2/26.
Accession Number: 20260102-5252.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/26.
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system ( https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp ) by querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or OPP@ferc.gov.
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Secretary.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company
The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in paragraph 7 of the Act.
Comments received are subject to public disclosure. In general, comments received will be made available without change and will not be modified to remove personal or business information including confidential, contact, or other identifying information. Comments should not include any information such as confidential information that would not be appropriate for public disclosure.
Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Benjamin W. McDonough, Deputy Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than January 22, 2026.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Lindsey Wieck, Director, Mergers & Acquisitions) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272. Comments can also be sent electronically to Comments.applications@dal.frb.org:
1. Reed Stewart, Danny Stewart, LeRuth Stewart, Ronda Stewart, Rope Stewart, and Riggin Stewart, all of Sterling City, Texas; as a group acting in concert, to acquire additional voting shares of Sterling City Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of The First National Bank of Sterling City, both of Sterling City, Texas.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,

Associate Secretary of the Board.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
Community Reinvestment Act Regulations Asset-Size Thresholds

AGENCY:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION:
Announcement of 2026 asset-size thresholds.

SUMMARY:
Under their Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations, the Board and the FDIC (collectively, the Agencies) annually adjust the asset-size thresholds used to define “small bank” and “intermediate small bank.” As required by the CRA regulations, the adjustment to the threshold amounts is based on the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). Applying this annual inflation adjustment methodology, the Agencies are announcing that, from January 7, 2026 through December 31, 2026, “small bank” will mean a bank that, as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.649 billion; and “intermediate small bank” will mean a small bank with assets of at least $412 million as of December 31 of both of the prior two calendar years and less than $1.649 billion as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years.

DATES:
These asset-size thresholds are in effect from January 7, 2026 through December 31, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Board: Amal S. Patel, Senior Counsel, Division of Consumer and Community Affairs; or Cody Gaffney, Counsel, Legal Division, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System at (202) 452-2412. For the hearing impaired and users of Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) and TTY-TRS, please call 711 from any telephone, anywhere in the United States.
FDIC: Patience R. Singleton, Senior Policy Analyst, Supervisory Policy Branch, Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection, (202) 898-6859, psingleton@fdic.gov; Cassandra Duhaney, Counsel, (202) 898-6804, cduhaney@fdic.gov; or Alys V. Brown, Senior Attorney, (202) 898-3565, alybrown@fdic.gov, Legal Division, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Community Reinvestment Act Asset-Size Thresholds
Under the current CRA regulations, ^1 “small bank” currently means a bank that, as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.609 billion; and “intermediate small bank” means a small bank with assets of at least $402 million as of December 31 of both of the prior two calendar years and less than $1.609 billion as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years. ^2 Pursuant to the annual inflation adjustment methodology described below, the Agencies are announcing that from January 7, 2026 through December 31, 2026, ^3 “small bank” will mean a bank that, as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.649 billion; and “intermediate small bank” will mean a small bank with assets of at least $412 million as of December 31 of both of the prior two calendar years and less than $1.649 billion as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years. ^4
^1 In October 2023, the Agencies and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) jointly issued a final rule to amend their Community Reinvestment Act regulations. See 89 FR 6574 (Feb. 1, 2024). Although the final rule was intended to take effect on April 1, 2024, the final rule has been challenged in litigation, and the final rule is currently enjoined. As such, the legacy CRA regulations (referred to in this notice as the “current CRA regulations”) remain in effect. The text of the current CRA regulations may be found: (i) in the 2022, 2023, or 2024 bound versions of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations; (ii) in the historical version of the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) as of March 29, 2024; or (iii) in appendix G of the final rule, as published in the eCFR on February 1, 2024.
^2 See 89 FR 106480 (Dec. 30, 2024).
^3 Although these annual inflation adjustments are intended to take effect on January 1 of each year, this inflation adjustment may take effect on a later date to the extent that delays in the availability of certain CPI-W data that were necessary to determine this inflation adjustment affect the timing of the publication of this inflation adjustment in the Federal Register . Please refer to the effective date indicated at the top of this notice.
^4 Historically, the Agencies have announced these annual inflation adjustments via rulemakings that amend the “small bank” and “intermediate small bank” definitions in their CRA regulations. See, e.g., 88 FR 87895 (Dec. 20, 2023) (implementing annual inflation adjustments for 2024). However, because the eCFR has been updated to reflect the text of the October 2023 CRA final rule, and because the October 2023 CRA final rule is currently enjoined, the Agencies have determined that this document (rather than a rulemaking) is the best vehicle for announcing the annual inflation adjustments for 2026. On July 16, 2025, the agencies issued a proposed rule that would rescind the October 2023 CRA final rule, as amended, and replace it with the current CRA regulations ( i.e., the regulations in effect on March 29, 2024), with conforming amendments to the agencies' definitions of “small bank” and “intermediate small bank.” See 90 FR 34086 (July 18, 2025).

Calculation Methodology
The Agencies' CRA regulations establish CRA performance standards for small banks and intermediate small banks. The CRA regulations define small and intermediate small banks by reference to asset-size criteria expressed in dollar amounts, and they further require the Agencies to publish annual adjustments to these dollar figures based on the year-to-year change in the average of the CPI-W, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million. ^5 This adjustment formula was first adopted for CRA purposes by the Agencies and the OCC in 2005. ^6
^5 See 12 CFR 228.12(u)(2) and 345.12(u)(2) of the current CRA regulations. Due to the fall 2025 Federal government shutdown, no CPI-W data for October 2025 is available; as a result, the Agencies necessarily made the adjustment to the threshold amounts using 11 months of available CPI-W data over the course of the relevant 12-month period.
^6 The OCC adjusts the asset-size criteria for institutions that are subject to OCC-issued CRA regulations, including national banks and Federal and State savings associations, separately from the Agencies.
During the 12-month period ending November 2025, the CPI-W increased by 2.51 percent. Because the year-to-year change in the CPI-W was non-zero, the Agencies are making this annual adjustment. Beginning January 7, 2026, banks that, as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.649 billion are small banks. Small banks with assets of at least $412 million as of December 31 of both of the prior two calendar years and less than $1.649 billion as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years are intermediate small banks.
The Agencies publish current and historical asset-size thresholds on the website of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. ^7
^7 See https://www.ffiec.gov/cra/examinations.htm (“Current and Historical Asset-Size Thresholds and Examples”).
By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, acting through the Deputy Secretary of the Board under delegated authority.
Benjamin W. McDonough,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dated at Washington, DC, on December 23, 2025.
Debra A. Decker,

Executive Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Public Comment Request; Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) Parts A and B Unobligated Balances and Rebate Addendum Tables, OMB No. 0906-0047—Extension

AGENCY:
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, HRSA submitted an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. Comments submitted during the first public review of this ICR will be provided to OMB. OMB will accept further comments from the public during the review and approval period. OMB may act on HRSA's ICR only after the 30-day comment period for this notice has closed.

DATES:
Comments on this ICR should be received no later than February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to: www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
To request a copy of the clearance requests submitted to OMB for review, email Samantha Miller, the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer, at paperwork@hrsa.gov or call (301) 443-3983.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Collection Request Title: Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program Parts A and B Unobligated Balances and Rebate Addendum Tables—OMB No. 0906-0047—Extension.
Abstract: HRSA's Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) funds and coordinates with cities, states and territories, and local clinics/community-based organizations to deliver efficient and effective HIV care, treatment, and support to low-income people diagnosed with HIV. Nearly two-thirds of RWHAP clients (patients) live at or below 100 percent of the federal poverty level. Since 1990, RWHAP has developed a comprehensive system of HIV service providers who deliver high quality direct health care and support services to over half a million people with diagnosed HIV—more than 50 percent of all people with diagnosed HIV in the United States.
Grant recipients funded under RWHAP Parts A, B, C, and D (codified under Title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act) are required to report financial data to HRSA at the beginning (Allocations Report) and at the end of each grant budget period (Expenditures Report) using the designated HRSA grant submission software which is approved by OMB under the 0915-0318 control number. HRSA collects unobligated balances (UOB) of federal funds and rebate addendum information by subprogram from their grant recipients. A UOB is the cumulative amount that is available for obligation in an unexpired account. HRSA uses the UOB and rebate addendum financial information to determine formula funding as directed by the RWHAP statute. HRSA is not planning to make changes to this information collection as part of this extension request.
Federal award expenditure data were previously collected when grant recipients submitted their annual Federal Financial Report (FFR SF-425), which HRSA then combined with the UOB and rebate addendum tables submitted by recipients using the designated HRSA grant submission software. HRSA created the currently approved instrument, which has been in use for several years now, to streamline the process for grant recipients by collecting financial information in the same location and at the same time as the FFR SF-425. Whereas grant recipients previously completed the FFR SF-425 in the HRSA Electronic Handbooks, they now complete it in the Payment Management System. Additionally, grant recipients complete the UOB and rebate addendum data tables as part of their FFR SF-425 submission in the Payment Management System.
A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2025, vol. 90, No. 166; pp. 42253-55. There were no public comments.
Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Before implementing the current process described above, RWHAP Part A and Part B recipients completed the UOB and rebate addendum tables in a non-electronic form and uploaded them as attachments to their FFR SF-425 submission. Renewal of the current process will continue to increase transparency and improve the quality of data submitted to HRSA. These UOB and rebate addendum tables are essential for allowing HRSA to ensure that RWHAP recipients are meeting the goal of accountability to Congress, clients, advocacy groups, and the general public. Information provided in the UOB and rebate addendum tables is critical for HRSA, cities, states and territories, local clinics, and individual providers to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.
Currently Approved RWHAP Part A Table
Unobligated balance (UOB) of Federal funds by subprogram | Category | Federal funds authorized | Unexpended carryover | Prior year (FY 20XX) | Current year (FY 20XX)
Part A Formula
Part A Supplemental
Part A MAI
Currently Approved RWHAP Part B Table
Unobligated balance (UOB) of Federal funds by subprogram | Category | Federal funds authorized | Unexpended carryover | Prior year (FY 20XX) | Current year (FY 20XX)
Part B Base
Part B ADAP
Part B Emerging Communities
Part B MAI
Part B ADAP Supplemental
Part A Transfer
Currently Approved RWHAP Part B Rebate Table
Ryan White Rebate Funding
Total Rebates Available
Expended Rebate Amount
Unexpended Rebate
Expended Rebate Amount to be Used to Reduce UOB
Likely Respondents: HRSA RWHAP Parts A and B Grant Recipients.
Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The last total annual burden hours estimated are summarized in the table below.
Total of Previously Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
Form name | Number of respondents | Number of responses per respondent | Total responses | Average burden per response (in hours) | Total burden hours
Part A UOB Table | 52 | 1 | 52 | 0.5 | 26.0
Part B UOB Table | 59 | 1 | 59 | 0.5 | 29.5
Total | 111 | | 111 | | 55.5
HRSA specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.
Amy P. McNulty,

Deputy Director, Executive Secretariat.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Public Comment Request; COVID-19 Provider Relief Fund and American Rescue Plan Rural Payment Reporting Activities, OMB No. 0906-0068—Revision

AGENCY:
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, HRSA submitted an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. Comments submitted during the first public review of this ICR will be provided to OMB. OMB will accept further comments from the public during the review and approval period. OMB may act on HRSA's ICR only after the 30-day comment period for this notice has closed.

DATES:
Comments on this ICR should be received no later than February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
To request a copy of the clearance requests submitted to OMB for review, email Samantha Miller, the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer, at paperwork@hrsa.gov or call (301) 443-3983.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Collection Request Title: COVID-19 Provider Relief Fund and American Rescue Plan Rural Payment Reporting Activities, OMB No. 0906-0068—Revision.
Abstract: HRSA disbursed the COVID-19 Provider Relief Fund (PRF) and American Rescue Plan (ARP) Rural payments to eligible health care providers to support health care-related expenses or lost revenues attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recipients of PRF and ARP Rural payments agreed to a set of Terms and Conditions (T&C), which, among other requirements, mandate compliance with certain reporting requirements that facilitate appropriate oversight of recipients' use of funds. Providers who have attested to the T&Cs regarding their PRF and ARP Rural payment(s), including the requirement that the provider “shall submit reports as the Secretary determines are needed to ensure compliance with conditions that are imposed on this Payment, and such reports shall be in such form, with such content, as specified by the Secretary in future program instructions directed to all recipients,” will use the HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal to submit information about their use of PRF and ARP Rural payments.
There will be one new Data Form Element, the Repayment ID, which is generated by HRSA and provided in the email giving the recipient the opportunity to report, and it will be entered by the provider in the HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal. Approximately 50 data elements will be removed from the PRF and ARP Rural Reporting Portal, including sections on personnel, patient, and facility metrics as well as survey questions on the PRF program. This is because these elements are no longer needed, since the data will be needed for more limited cases, as outlined in the “Likely Respondents” section below. In addition, fields related to PRF interest earned, nursing home infection control payment expenditures, and other PRF payment expenditures will be consolidated to overall totals. As a result, the total number of elements that can be submitted by recipients will decline from 123 to approximately 53. Furthermore, the supplemental document “Post-Payment Notice of Reporting Requirements” has been updated to reflect the removal of reporting periods 8 and 9 (including the applicable payment received period and period of availability dates), as the Public Health Emergency ended on May 11, 2023.
A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register on June 26, 2025, vol. 90, No. 121; pp. 27324-26. There was one out-of-scope comment criticizing the authorizing legislation. No changes were made to the collection.
Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Information collected will allow for (1) assessing whether recipients have met statutory and programmatic requirements, (2) conducting audits, (3) gathering data required to report on findings with respect to the disbursements of PRF and ARP Rural payments, and (4) supporting program evaluation. HRSA staff will also use information collected to identify and report on trends in health care metrics and expenditures before and during the allowable period for expending PRF and ARP Rural payments.
If the information is not collected, HRSA will not fulfill its responsibility to oversee reporting requirements that facilitate appropriate oversight of recipients' use of funds, and PRF and ARP Rural recipients will not be able to fulfill their statutory reporting requirement. HRSA will not be able to provide reports to Congress and other stakeholders on the use of more than $178 billion in PRF funds and $8.5 billion in ARP Rural funds.
Likely Respondents: PRF and ARP Rural payment recipients who have received more than $10,000 in aggregate PRF and ARP Rural payments during one of the Payment Received Periods outlined below and agreed to the associated T&Cs are required to submit a report in the HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal during the applicable Reporting Time Period.
Reporting period | Payment received period (payments exceeding $10,000 in aggregate received) | Reporting time period
Period 1 | April 10, 2020, to June 30, 2020 | July 1, 2021, to September 30, 2021.
Period 2 | July 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020 | January 1, 2022, to March 31, 2022.
Period 3 | January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021 | July 1, 2022, to September 30, 2022.
Period 4 | July 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021 | January 1, 2023, to March 31, 2023.
| Period 5 | January 1, 2022, to June 30, 2022 | July 1, 2023, to September 30, 2023.
Period 6 | July 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022 | January 1, 2024, to March 31, 2024.
Period 7 | January 1, 2023, to June 30, 2023 | July 1, 2024, to September 30, 2024.
While the standard reporting time periods have ended, there are still scenarios in which providers will be required to submit reporting documents to HRSA. These include:
• Providers who receive a Final Repayment Notice, based on a HRSA finding of reporting non-compliance, who submit a Decision Review request and are provided an Opportunity to Report. The Opportunity to Report allows providers another chance to submit a report to come into compliance.
• Adjudicative orders that would require HRSA to allow a Provider an opportunity to report.
• Providers who have prevailed in a dispute or have entered into a settlement with HRSA may need to submit a report.
These scenarios make it necessary to retain and extend approval of the information collection activities associated with required reporting to support compliance, validation, and enforcement actions. Providers would provide documentation through the HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal based on the reporting period in which they received the funds in question.
Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.
Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
Form name | Number of respondents | Number of responses per respondent | Total responses | Average burden per response (in hours) | Total burden hours
HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 1 (Providers who received payments April 10, 2020, to June 30, 2020) | 10 | 1 | 10 | 5.43 | 54.30
HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 2 (Providers who received payments July 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020) | 10 | 1 | 10 | 4.22 | 42.20
HRSA Consolidated PRF Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 3 (Providers who received payments, January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021) | 10 | 1 | 10 | 5.88 | 58.80
HRSA Consolidated PRF and ARP Rural Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 4 (Providers who received payments July 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021) | 10 | 1 | 10 | 5.26 | 52.60
HRSA Consolidated PRF and ARP Rural Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 5 (Providers who received payments January 1, 2022, to June 30, 2022) | 5 | 1 | 5 | 5.18 | 25.90
HRSA Consolidated PRF and ARP Rural Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 6 (Providers who received payments July 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022) | 50 | 1 | 50 | 7.37 | 368.50
HRSA Consolidated PRF and ARP Rural Reporting Portal, Reporting Period 7 (Providers who received payments January 1, 2023, to June 30, 2023) | 5 | 1 | 5 | 5.35 | 26.75
Total | 100 | | 100 | | 629.05
Amy P. McNulty,

Deputy Director, Executive Secretariat.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting
Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Name of Committee: National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research.
Date: February 10, 2026.
Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications and/or proposals.
Address: National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 1100, Rockledge, MD 20892.
Meeting Format: Virtual Meeting.
Contact Person: Issel Anne Lim, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Division of Extramural Operations, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Room 3186, Bethesda, MD 20892, isselanne.lim@nih.gov.
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.genome.gov/council, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.
Dated: January 5, 2026.
Bruce A. George,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Meeting
Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research.
The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. The meeting will be videocast and can be accessed from https://videocast.nih.gov/ on the day of the meeting. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.
Name of Committee: National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research.
Date: February 9, 2026.
Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Agenda: To discuss matters of program relevance.
Address: National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 1100, Rockledge, MD 20892.
Meeting Format: Virtual Meeting.
Contact Person: Issel Anne Lim, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Division of Extramural Operations, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Room 3186, Bethesda, MD 20892, isselanne.lim@nih.gov.
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee no later than 15 days after the meeting by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.genome.gov/council, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.
Dated: January 5, 2026.
Bruce A. George,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
[OMB Control Number 1615-0120]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Application for Free Training for Civics and Citizenship Teachers of Adults; Civics and Citizenship Toolkit

AGENCY:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION:
60-Day notice.

SUMMARY:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden ( i.e., the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

DATES:
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0120 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2011-0001. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal website at https://www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID number USCIS-2008-0021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, John R. Pfirrmann-Powell, Acting Deputy Chief, telephone number (240) 721-3000 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at https://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS Contact Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: https://www.regulations.gov and entering USCIS-2011-0001 in the search box. Comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation must be provided. All submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of https://www.regulations.gov.
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of This Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Free Training for Civics and Citizenship of Adults; Civics and Citizenship Toolkit.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: G-1190, G-1515; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. This information is necessary to register for civics and citizenship of adults training and to obtain a civics and citizenship toolkit.
(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Form G-1190 is 2,500 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.083 hours. The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Form G-1515 is 1,200 and the estimated hour burden per response is responses is 0.166 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 407 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $0. The registration occurs electronically which eliminates any cost for postage, and no other costs are incurred by the respondent.
Dated: December 31, 2025.
John R. Pfirrmann-Powell,

Acting Deputy Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-6560-N-02]
Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (TIAC) Membership Announcement

AGENCY:
Office of Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
This notice announces the list of Committee Members of HUD's Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (TIAC) starting in January 2026. The committee will perform several advisory functions while it considers HUD policies that affect Indian Country. HUD will publish a subsequent notice with details of any scheduled TIAC meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hilary C. Atkin, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 4108, Washington, DC 20410, telephone number 202-401-7914 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals with speech and communication disabilities. To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
On November 15, 2021 (86 FR 63051), to enhance consultation and collaboration with Tribal governments, HUD published a notice in the Federal Register announcing its intention to establish its first Tribal advisory committee known as the “Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee” (TIAC). The notice also solicited Tribal feedback on a proposed TIAC structure and its functions. On March 31, 2022 (87 FR 18807), HUD published a notice in the Federal Register that announced the final structure of the TIAC and requested the submission of Tribal nominations to the TIAC. HUD selected 15 members for its inaugural TIAC, beginning in January 2023.
On April 8, 2024 (89 FR 24484), HUD published a notice in the Federal Register requesting submission of Tribal nominations to the TIAC for two-year terms to begin in January 2025 (replacing eight positions whose terms were set to expire at the end of December 2024).
On May 19, 2025 (90 FR 21326), HUD published a notice in the Federal Register requesting submission of Tribal nominations to the TIAC for two-year terms to begin in January 2026 (filling eight vacant positions).

II. The Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee
Today's notice announces the membership of the TIAC starting January 2026 (returning members as well as new members). The purpose of the TIAC is to further facilitate intergovernmental communication between HUD and Tribal leaders of federally recognized Tribes on all HUD programs, to make recommendations to HUD regarding current program regulations that may require revision, as well as suggest rulemaking methods to develop such changes, and to advise in the development of HUD's American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) housing priorities. The function of TIAC is not to replace Tribal consultation, but rather to serve as a tool to help supplement it.
In making the selections for membership on the TIAC, HUD's goal was to establish a committee whose membership reflects a balanced representation of small, medium, and large Indian tribes across Indian Country. In addition to the Tribal representatives on the committee, there will be several HUD representatives, each representing various program offices, on the committee.
HUD is announcing the Tribal Committee Members in this Notice. However, each Committee Member should have an eligible Alternate in queue in case the Committee Member is unable to attend a particular committee meeting. As a reminder, the Alternate must meet the same eligibility criteria required of the selected Committee Member, specifically, that they must be either a duly elected Tribal official or Tribal employee. The Alternate cannot be a Tribally Designated Housing Entity employee. In the absence of a Committee Member, the Alternate will have the same rights, responsibilities, duties, and functions as a Committee Member during meetings. Each Committee Member has the discretion to decide who will best represent them in their absence. A Committee Member unable to attend any session must inform HUD in writing with an original signature as to whom they have selected to represent them and will specify the term. HUD will review all Alternates before a meeting to confirm that they meet the eligibility criteria for Alternates specified by HUD.
The final list of members of the TIAC is as follows:

Serving New Terms
(1) Kenneth Brink, Tribal Council Vice Chairman, Karuk Tribe, Happy Camp, California.
(2) Eugene DeCora, Council Member, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, Winnebago, Nebraska.
(3) Anita Lozinto, Board of Directors At-Large Member, Dry Creek Rancheria of Pomo Indians, Santa Rosa, California.
(4) Teri Nutter, Council Member, Gulkana Village Council, Gakona, Alaska.
(5) Jacqueline Pata, 1st Vice President, Central Council of Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, Juneau, Alaska.
(6) Ashley Sexton, Tribal Administrator, Catawba Indian Nation, Rock Hill, South Carolina.
(7) Genia Williams, Council Treasurer, Walker River Paiute Tribe, Schurz, Nevada.
(8) Bobby Yandell, Executive Director of Housing, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Durant, Oklahoma.

Serving Existing Terms
(1) Jamie Azure, Chairman, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, Belcourt, North Dakota.
(2) Kelly Cook, Executive Director, Office of Housing, Chickasaw Nation, Ada, Oklahoma.
(3) Todd Enlow, Executive Director of Housing, Cherokee Nation, Tahlequah, Oklahoma.
(4) Benjamin Herne, Tribal Sub-Chief, Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Akwesasne, New York.
(5) Ryman LeBeau, Chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Eagle Butte, South Dakota.
(6) Toby McClary, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, Grand Ronde, Oregon.
(7) Charles Matthew Sisneros, Lieutenant Governor, Santa Clara Pueblo, Española, New Mexico.
Hilary C. Atkin,

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[A2407-014-004-065516, #O2509-014-004-125222]
Application for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Delta River, Tangle River, and Tangle Lakes, in Alaska

AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice of application.

SUMMARY:
On June 12, 2019, the State of Alaska (State) finalized an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest (RDI) from the United States for the submerged lands underlying portions of the Delta River, Tangle River, Lower Tangle Lake, Long Tangle Lake, Round Tangle Lake, Tangle Lakes and Upper Tangle Lake south of Delta Junction, in Alaska. An RDI, if issued, would disclaim the United States' interest in the lands underlying the portions of the waterbodies in the RDI application. This notice is to notify the public of the pending RDI application and supporting evidence submitted by the State, and that the BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the application.

DATES:
All comments should be received on or before February 6, 2026. The BLM will issue a decision on the application on or after April 7, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
The State's RDI application and its attachments may be viewed at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI/tanana, under the section titled, “Delta River System (Delta River, Tangle Lakes and Tangle River).” Public comments may be mailed, emailed, or hand delivered. Mail comments to: Bureau of Land Management, ATTN: Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), 222 West 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; email comments to bshelby@blm.gov; or hand deliver comments during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time) to the BLM Public Information Center, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), at 222 West 7th Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; 907-271-5596; bshelby@blm.gov; or visit the BLM's RDI website at https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI.
Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay services offered within their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On June 12, 2019, the State filed a final application (AA-95490) for an RDI pursuant to section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1745), and the regulations in 43 CFR subpart 1864, which authorize the BLM to issue an RDI. An RDI is a legal document through which the BLM would disclaim the United States' interest in or ownership of specified lands. This notice of application is to inform the public of the pending application and the State's supporting evidence, as well as to provide the opportunity to comment or provide additional information to the BLM.
The State's RDI application asserts that the waterbodies were navigable in fact on the date of Alaska Statehood, January 3, 1959. As such, the application contends that ownership of the submerged lands underlying the Delta River, Tangle River, Lower Tangle Lake, Long Tangle Lake, Round Tangle Lake, Tangle Lakes and Upper Tangle Lake automatically passed from the United States to the State on the date of Statehood under the Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged Lands Act of 1988, Alaska Statehood Act, and other title navigability laws.
The RDI application includes approximately 14,026 acres of submerged lands for the following land descriptions: (1) The Delta River: All submerged lands between the ordinary high-water lines of the left and right banks of the Delta River beginning at the southern boundary of Fort Greely in secs. 24 and 25, T. 14 S., R. 9 E., Fairbanks Meridian (F.M.), and secs. 19 and 30, T. 14 S., R. 10 E., F.M., upstream to the Tangle River within sec. 25, T. 20 S., R. 9 E., F.M; (2) Tangle River: All submerged lands between the ordinary high water lines of the left and right banks of the Tangle River beginning within sec. 25, T. 20 S., R. 9 E., F.M, upstream to the inlet of Tangle Lake within sec. 8, T. 22 S., R. 9 E., F.M., including; (3) The Tangle Lakes: All submerged lands between the ordinary highwater lines of the Tangle Lakes; including Lower Tangle Lake, Long Tangle Lake, Round Tangle Lake, Tangle Lakes and Upper Tangle Lake.
The BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the State's RDI application. Examples of additional information are photographs or videos capturing boats being used on the waterbodies, historical or present-day use diaries, or specific verbal knowledge, whether passed down through the region, or present-day use, information on the type of boat or watercraft used, and information on the time of year boats are, or were, used. In addition to boat use, the BLM is seeking hydrological data and/or photographs that capture waterbody characteristics such as depth, width, obstructions or obstacles, or shallow stream sections.
In previous Federal Register notices regarding RDI applications, the BLM has provided a 90-day public comment period. The BLM has now determined to offer a 30-day public comment period, as is permitted under 43 CFR subpart 1864.2. The BLM has determined that 30 days is adequate and sufficient time under the circumstances to receive substantive and relevant public input. Additionally, a 30-day public comment period provides the BLM with a minimum of 60 days to review comments received before making a decision on the application on or after 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register .
Copies of the State's RDI application and comments provided in response to this notice will be available for public review at the BLM Alaska State Office (see ADDRESSES earlier), during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time, Monday through Friday, excepting Federal holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
(Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1745 and 43 CFR subpart 1864.)
Bettie Shelby,

Acting Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Cadastral.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[A2407-014-004-065516, #O2509-014-004-125222; AKAK106657111]
Application for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the East Fork of the Arolik River, the Arolik River, and Arolik Lake in Alaska

AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice of application.

SUMMARY:
On November 2, 2017, the State of Alaska (State) finalized an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a recordable disclaimer of interest (RDI) from the United States for the submerged lands underlying portions of the Arolik River System, including the East Fork of the Arolik River, the Arolik River and Arolik Lake in western Alaska. An RDI, if issued, would disclaim the United States' interest in the lands underlying the portions of the waterbodies in the RDI application. This notice informs the public of the pending RDI application and supporting evidence submitted by the State and requests additional information related to the waterbodies in the application.

DATES:
All comments should be received on or before February 6, 2026. The BLM will issue a decision on the application on or after April 7, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
The State's RDI application and its attachments may be viewed at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI/kuskokwim, under the section titled, “Arolik River.” Public comments may be mailed, emailed, or hand delivered. Mail comments to: Bureau of Land Management, ATTN: Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), 222 West 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; email comments to bshelby@blm.gov; or hand deliver comments during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time) to the BLM Public Information Center, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), at 222 West 7th Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; 907-271-5596; bshelby@blm.gov; or visit the BLM's RDI website at https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay services offered within their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On November 2, 2017, the State filed a final application (AA-93319) for an RDI pursuant to section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1745), and the regulations in 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864, which authorize the BLM to issue an RDI. An RDI is a legal document through which the BLM would disclaim the United States' interest in or ownership of specified lands. This notice of application informs the public of the pending application and the State's supporting evidence and provides the public an opportunity to comment or provide additional information to the BLM.
The State's RDI application asserts that the waterbodies were navigable in fact on the date of Alaska Statehood, January 3, 1959. As such, the application contends that ownership of the submerged lands underlying the East Fork of the Arolik River, the Arolik River and Arolik Lake automatically passed from the United States to the State on the date of Statehood under the Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged Lands Act of 1988, the Alaska Right of Way Act of 1898, Alaska Statehood Act, and other title navigability laws.
The RDI application includes eligible submerged lands for the following land descriptions: (1) the East Fork Arolik River including Arolik Lake: All submerged lands between the ordinary high-water lines of the left and right banks of the East Fork Arolik River beginning at the outlet of Arolik Lake within sec. 24, T. 8 S. R. 70 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska (S.M.), downstream to the east boundary of sec. 10, T. 8 S., R. 71 W., S.M.; and all submerged lands below the ordinary high water line of Arolik Lake within secs. 23, 24, and 25, T. 8 S., R. 70 W., S.M., and secs. 19, 30, and 31, T. 8 S., R. 69 W., S.M.; (2) Arolik River: All submerged lands between the ordinary high water lines of the left and right banks of the Arolik River, within T. 7 S., R. 71 W., S.M. The BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the State's RDI application. Examples of additional information are photographs or videos capturing boats being used on the waterbodies, historical or present-day use diaries, or specific verbal knowledge, whether passed down through the region, or present-day use, information on the type of boat or watercraft used, and information on the time of year boats are, or were, used. In addition to boat use, the BLM is seeking hydrological data and/or photographs that capture waterbody characteristics such as depth, width, obstructions or obstacles, or shallow stream sections.
In previous Federal Register notices regarding RDI applications, the BLM provided a 90-day public comment period. The BLM determined that 30 days is adequate and sufficient time under the circumstances to receive substantive and relevant public input as is permitted under 43 CFR 1864.2. Additionally, a 30-day public comment period provides the BLM with a minimum of 60 days to review comments received before making a decision on the application on or after 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register .
Copies of the State's RDI application and comments provided in response to this notice will be available for public review at the BLM Alaska State Office (see ADDRESSES earlier), during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time, Monday through Friday, excepting Federal holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
(Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1745 and 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864)
Bettie Shelby,

Acting Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Cadastral.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[A2407-014-004-065516, #O2509-014-004-125222; AKAK106470188]
Application for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Goodnews River System, Alaska

AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice of application.

SUMMARY:
On December 28, 2017, the State of Alaska (State) filed an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a recordable disclaimer of interest (RDI) from the United States for the submerged lands underlying portions of the Goodnews River System, east of Goodnews Bay in western Alaska. On December 16, 2020, the BLM received a letter from the State which amended that application to remove Slate Creek. Thus, the final application includes the submerged lands for portions of Goodnews River, Goodnews Lake, Igmiumanik River, South Fork of the Goodnews River, Tivyagik Creek, an unnamed tributary of Tivyagik Creek, the Middle Fork of the Goodnews River, Middle Fork Lake, Kukaktlik River, and Kukaktlim Lake east of Goodnews Bay, Alaska. An RDI, if issued, would disclaim the United States' interest in the lands underlying the portions of the waterbodies in the RDI application. This notice informs the public of the pending RDI application and supporting evidence submitted by the State and requests additional information related to the waterbodies in the application.

DATES:
All comments should be received on or before February 6, 2026. The BLM will issue a decision on the application on or after April 7, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
The State's RDI application and its attachments may be viewed at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI/kuskokwim, under the section titled, “Goodnews River System.” Public comments may be mailed, emailed, or hand delivered. Mail comments to: Bureau of Land Management ATTN: Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), 222 West 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; email comments to bshelby@blm.gov; or hand deliver comments during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time) to the BLM Public Information Center, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), at 222 West 7th Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; 907-271-5596; bshelby@blm.gov; or visit the BLM's RDI website at https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay services offered within their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On December 16, 2020, the BLM received a final amended application (AA-92956) from the State for an RDI pursuant to section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1745), and the regulations in 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864, which authorize the BLM to issue an RDI. An RDI is a legal document through which the BLM would disclaim the United States' interest in or ownership of specified lands. This notice of application is to inform the public of the pending application and the State's supporting evidence, as well as to provide the opportunity to comment or provide additional information to the BLM.
The State's RDI application asserts that the waterbodies were navigable in fact on the date of Alaska Statehood, January 3, 1959. As such, the application contends that ownership of the lands underlying portions of the Goodnews River, Goodnews Lake, Igmiumanik River, South Fork of the Goodnews River, Tivyagik Creek, an unnamed tributary of Tivyagik Creek, the Middle Fork of the Goodnews River, Middle Fork Lake, Kukaktlik River, and Kukaktlim Lake automatically passed from the United States to the State on the date of Statehood under the Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged Lands Act of 1988, the Alaska Right of Way Act of 1898, the Alaska Statehood Act, and other title navigability laws.
The RDI application includes the eligible submerged lands for the following land descriptions: (1) Goodnews River, including Goodnews Lake: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Goodnews River, from the confluence with an unnamed creek near river mile 78 within sec. 3, T. 7 S., R. 66 W., Seward Meridian, downstream and including Goodnews Lake, to the location where the river enters T. 10 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; (2) Igmiumanik River: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Igmiumanik River from the confluence with an unnamed creek within the NE 1/4 NE 1/4 sec. 19, T. 7 S., R. 66 W., Seward Meridian, downstream to the confluence with the Goodnews River in sec. 35, T. 7 S., R. 66 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; (3) South Fork Goodnews River: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the South Fork Goodnews River from the confluence with an unnamed creek near river mile 25.7 within sec. 3, T. 12 S., R. 70 W., Seward Meridian, downstream through sec. 22, T. 12 S., R. 72 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; (4) Tivyagik Creek: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Tivyagik Creek from the confluence with an “unnamed tributary” near river mile 8.25 within sec. 28, T. 12 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, downstream to its confluence with the South Fork Goodnews River in sec. 7, T. 12 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; (5) Unnamed Tributary of Tivyagik Creek: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Unnamed Tributary of Tivyagik Creek from the confluence of the unnamed tributary and an unnamed creek near river mile 3 within sec. 32, T. 12 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, downstream to its confluence with Tivyagik Creek in sec. 28, T. 12 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; (6) Middle Fork Goodnews River and Middle Fork Lake: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Middle Fork Goodnews River from river mile 53 within the SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 10, T. 9 S., R. 67 W., Seward Meridian, downstream and including Middle Fork Lake, to the location where the river enters T. 11 S., R. 71 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska; and (7) Kukaktlik River and Kukaktlim Lake: All submerged lands within the ordinary high water lines of Kukaktlim Lake and between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks of the Kukaktlik River from the outlet of Kukaktlim Lake in sec. 1, T. 9 S., R. 67 W., Seward Meridian, downstream to its confluence with the Middle Fork Goodnews River in sec. 23, T. 10 S., R. 69 W., Seward Meridian, Alaska.
The BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the State's RDI application. Examples of additional information are photographs or videos capturing boats being used on the waterbodies, historical or present-day use diaries, or specific verbal knowledge, whether passed down through the region, or present-day use, information on the type of boat or watercraft used, and information on the time of year boats are, or were, used. In addition to boat use, the BLM is seeking hydrological data and/or photographs that capture waterbody characteristics such as depth, width, obstructions or obstacles, or shallow stream sections.
In previous Federal Register notices regarding RDI applications, the BLM provided a 90-day public comment period. The BLM determined that 30 days is adequate and sufficient time under the circumstances to receive substantive and relevant public input as is permitted under 43 CFR 1864.2. Additionally, a 30-day public comment period provides the BLM with a minimum of 60 days to review comments received before making a decision on the application on or after 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register .
Copies of the State's RDI application and comments provided in response to this notice will be available for public review at the BLM Alaska State Office (see ADDRESSES above), during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time, Monday through Friday, excepting Federal holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
(Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1745 and 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864)
Bettie Shelby,

Acting Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Cadastral.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[A2407-014-004-065516; #O2509-014-004-125222; AKAK106592146]
Application for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the West Fork of the Dennison Fork and the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River in Alaska

AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice of application.

SUMMARY:
On May 28, 2019, the State of Alaska (State) finalized an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest (RDI) from the United States for the submerged lands underlying portions of the West Fork Dennison Fork and the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River, south of Chicken, Alaska. An RDI, if issued, would disclaim the United States' interest in the lands underlying the portions of the waterbodies in the RDI application. This notice is to notify the public of the pending RDI application and supporting evidence submitted by the State, and that the BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the application.

DATES:
All comments should be received on or before February 5, 2026. The BLM will issue a decision on the application on or after April 7, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
The State's RDI application and its attachments may be viewed at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI/fortymile, under the section titled, “West Fork of the Dennison Fork and the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River.” Public comments may be mailed, emailed, or hand delivered. Mail comments to: Bureau of Land Management, ATTN: Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), 222 West 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; email comments to bshelby@blm.gov; or hand deliver comments during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time) to the BLM Public Information Center, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), at 222 West 7th Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; 907-271-5596; bshelby@blm.gov; or visit the BLM's RDI website at https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay services offered within their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On May 28, 2019, the State filed a final application (FF-97491) for an RDI pursuant to section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1745), and the regulations in 43 CFR subpart 1864, which authorize the BLM to issue an RDI. An RDI is a legal document through which the BLM would disclaim the United States' interest in or ownership of specified lands. This notice of application is to inform the public of the pending application and the State's supporting evidence, as well as to provide the opportunity to comment or provide additional information to the BLM.
The State's RDI application asserts that the waterbodies were navigable in fact on the date of Alaska Statehood, January 3, 1959. As such, the application contends that ownership of the submerged lands underlying the West Fork of the Dennison Fork and the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River automatically passed from the United States to the State on the date of Statehood under the Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged Lands Act of 1988, the Alaska Right of Way Act of 1898, Alaska Statehood Act, and other title navigability laws.
The RDI application includes approximately 425 acres of submerged lands for the following land descriptions: (1) The West Fork of the Dennison Fork: All submerged lands between the ordinary high-water lines of the left and right banks of the West Fork of the Dennison Fork from the boundary of the Fortymile Wild and Scenic River Corridor within sec. 16, T. 24 N., R. 16 E., Copper River Meridian, Alaska (C.R.M.), downstream to the confluence with the Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River within sec. 34, T. 25 N., R. 17 E., C.R.M.; and (2) The Dennison Fork of the Fortymile River: All submerged lands between the ordinary high water lines of the left and right banks of Dennison Fork from the confluence with the West Fork of the Dennison Fork within sec. 34, T. 25 N., R. 17 E., C.R.M., downstream to the confluence of the Mosquito and Dennison Forks of the Fortymile River within sec. 8, T. 26 N., R. 18 E., C.R.M.
The BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the State's RDI application. Examples of additional information are photographs or videos capturing boats being used on the waterbodies, historical or present-day use diaries, or specific verbal knowledge, whether passed down through the region, or present-day use, information on the type of boat or watercraft used, and information on the time of year boats are, or were, used. In addition to boat use, the BLM is seeking hydrological data and/or photographs that capture waterbody characteristics such as depth, width, obstructions or obstacles, or shallow stream sections.
In previous Federal Register notices regarding RDI applications, the BLM provided a 90-day public comment period. The BLM determined that 30 days is adequate and sufficient time under the circumstances to receive substantive and relevant public input as is permitted under 43 CFR subpart 1864.2. Additionally, a 30-day public comment period provides the BLM with a minimum of 60 days to review comments received before making a decision on the application on or after 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register .
Copies of the State's RDI application and comments provided in response to this notice will be available for public review at the BLM Alaska State Office (see ADDRESSES earlier), during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time, Monday through Friday, excepting Federal holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
(Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1745 and 43 CFR subpart 1864)
Bettie Shelby,

Acting Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Cadastral.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[A2407-014-004-065516, #O2509-014-004-125222; AKAK106551968]
Application for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest for Lands Underlying Portions of the Kwethluk River in Alaska

AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice of application.

SUMMARY:
On February 20, 2019, the State of Alaska (State) finalized an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a recordable disclaimer of interest (RDI) from the United States for the submerged lands underlying portions of the Kwethluk River, adjacent to and south of Kwethluk in Alaska. An RDI, if issued, would disclaim the United States' interest in the lands underlying the portions of the waterbodies in the RDI application. This notice informs the public of the pending RDI application and supporting evidence submitted by the State and requests additional information related to the waterbodies in the application.

DATES:
All comments should be received on or before February 6, 2026. The BLM will issue a decision on the application on or after April 7, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
The State's RDI application and its attachments may be viewed at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI/kuskokwim, under the section titled, “Kwethluk River.” Public comments may be mailed, emailed, or hand delivered. Mail comments to: Bureau of Land Management, ATTN: Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), 222 West 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; email comments to bshelby@blm.gov; or hand deliver comments during normal business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time) to the BLM Public Information Center, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bettie Shelby, Acting Branch Chief, Lands and Realty (AK-941), at 222 West 7th Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513; 907-271-5596; bshelby@blm.gov; or visit the BLM's RDI website at https://www.blm.gov/programs/lands-and-realty/regional-information/alaska/RDI.
Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay services offered within their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On February 20, 2019, the State filed a final application (AA-95314) for an RDI pursuant to section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1745), and the regulations in 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864, which authorize the BLM to issue an RDI. An RDI is a legal document through which the BLM would disclaim the United States' interest in or ownership of specified lands. This notice of application is to inform the public of the pending application and the State's supporting evidence, as well as to provide the opportunity to comment or provide additional information to the BLM.
The State's RDI application asserts that the waterbodies were navigable in fact on the date of Alaska Statehood, January 3, 1959. As such, the application contends that ownership of the submerged lands underlying the Kwethluk River automatically passed from the United States to the State on the date of Statehood under the Equal Footing Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Submerged Lands Act of 1988, the Alaska Right of Way Act of 1898, Alaska Statehood Act, and other title navigability laws.
The RDI application includes eligible submerged lands for the following land description: (1) Kwethluk River: All submerged lands between the lines of ordinary high water of the left and right banks within the following:

Seward Meridian, Alaska
T. 1 N., R. 62 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 29, 30, and 32.
T. 1 N., R. 63 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 2, 3, 11, 13, 14;
Sec. 23, excluding U.S. Survey No. 12302;
Sec. 24, excluding U.S. Survey No. 12302;
Sec. 25.
T. 2 N., R. 63 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 18 thru 21, 28, 33, and 34.
T. 2 N., R. 64 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, and 13.
T. 3 N., R 64 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 31, 32, and 33.
T. 3 N., 65 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 19, 21, 25 thru 30, and 36.
T. 3 N., R. 66 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 23, 24, 26 thru 30, and 32.
T. 2 N., R. 67 W., unsurveyed,
Sec. 5.
T. 3 N., R. 67 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 22 thru 28, and 30 thru 33.
T. 5 N., R. 67 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 6, 7, 8, 17 thru 20, and 29 thru 32.
T. 3 N., R. 68 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 4, 9, 16, 21, 22, 23, 25, and 26.
T. 4 N., R. 68 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 4, 8, 9, 16, 17, 20, 21, 28, 29, and 33.
T. 1 S., R. 62 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 7, 18, 19, 29, and 30.
T. 1 S., R. 63 W., unsurveyed,
Secs. 1, 2, 3, 12, and 13.
The BLM is seeking additional information related to the waterbodies in the State's RDI application. Examples of additional information are photographs or videos capturing boats being used on the waterbodies, historical or present-day use diaries, or specific verbal knowledge, whether passed down through the region, or present-day use, information on the type of boat or watercraft used, and information on the time of year boats are, or were, used. In addition to boat use, the BLM is seeking hydrological data and/or photographs that capture waterbody characteristics such as depth, width, obstructions or obstacles, or shallow stream sections.
In previous Federal Register notices regarding RDI applications, the BLM provided a 90-day public comment period. The BLM determined that 30 days is adequate and sufficient time under the circumstances to receive substantive and relevant public input as is permitted under 43 CFR 1864.2. Additionally, a 30-day public comment period provides the BLM with a minimum of 60 days to review comments received before making a decision on the application on or after 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register .
Copies of the State's RDI application and comments provided in response to this notice will be available for public review at the BLM Alaska State Office (see ADDRESSES earlier), during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Alaska Time, Monday through Friday, excepting Federal holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
(Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1745 and 43 CFR part 1860, subpart 1864.)
Bettie Shelby,

Acting Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and Cadastral.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6824; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041685; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of Defense, Division of Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base, Port Saint Joe, FL

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the U.S. Department of Defense, Division of Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base (AFB) has completed an inventory of associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice to Jose Cintron, Tyndall AFB, 102 Checkertail Way, Building 36234, Port Saint Joe, FL 32403-5014, email jose.cintron.1@us.af.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Tyndall AFB, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
The 92 associated funerary objects are Santa Rosa/Swift Creek type ceramics, Weeden Island type ceramics, Deptford type ceramics, faunal bone, and ochre. These cultural items are reasonably believed to be funerary objects associated with ancestors previously published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the Federal Register on February 28, 2024 (89 FR 14717) and a Notice of Intended Disposition (2017-0103). The first set of associated funerary items are believed to be removed from a mound near Davis Point Mound (either 8BY007 or 8BY009) on Tyndall AFB. Additional funerary items from nearby cemetery sites—Baker's Landing (8BY029) and Hare Hammock (8BY030/031)—were also part of this holding and are reasonably believed to be associated as well. The associated funerary items were presumably removed from federal property by an anonymous individual prior to the construction of the Pelican Point Golf Course sometime in the 1950s or 1960s and transferred to Tyndall AFB from the National Park Service (NPS) Southeast Archaeeological Center (SEAC) in July 2024. The second set of associated funerary items were removed from the Hole 8 site (8BY165) by Florida State University in 1979, transferred to NPS SEAC, and subsequently transferred to Tyndall AFB.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The Tyndall AFB has determined that:
• The 92 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 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians; Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; Poarch Band of Creek Indians; Seminole Tribe of Florida; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma; and the Thlopthlocco Tribal Town.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Tyndall AFB 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 Tyndall AFB 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6833; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041694; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Shelburne Museum, Shelburne, VT

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Shelburne Museum intends to repatriate a certain cultural item that meets the definition of a sacred object and that has a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural item in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice to Alexander Kikutis, Shelburne Museum, P.O. Box 10, Shelburne, VT 05482, email AKikutis@ShelburneMuseum.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The sacred object is a Cochiti Pueblo Canteen (2023-5.7). In April 2023, Shelburne Museum received a donation of Pueblo pottery. Teressa Perry, widow of Anthony Perry, donated this item. Ms. Perry inherited this item from her husband, Anthony Perry, in 2017. Mr. Perry purchased this item from Robert V. Gallegos an antiques dealer in Albuquerque, NM.

Determinations
The Shelburne Museum has determined that:
• The one sacred object described in this notice is a specific ceremonial object 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 connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Pueblo of Cochiti, New Mexico.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Shelburne Museum must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural item are considered a single request and not competing requests. 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.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3004 and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.9.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6827; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041688; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to Ruzel Benedicto Ednalino, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, email ruzel.b.ednalino@usace.army.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
Human remains representing, at least, one individual were removed from CA-MEN-405 in Mendocino County, CA. The 25 associated funerary objects are: three bone awls, two bone matting needles, two charcoal samples, one lot of faunal remains, one nail, three pestles, two chert projectile points, two obsidian projectile points, and nine chert scrapers (one has not yet been located). Site CA-MEN-405 was first identified by Franklin Fenenga in 1948 as part of the Smithsonian Institution's River Basin Surveys in preparation for construction of the Coyote Valley Dam. Adan E. Treganza from San Francisco State University conducted a salvage excavation beginning in September of 1957. Consultation with the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians of California and ethnohistoric studies completed by Samuel A. Barrett indicate that CA-MEN-405 is likely associated with the Pomo village of Chodakai.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• The 25 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 Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians of California.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District 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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6822; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041683; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Fowler Museum, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Fowler Museum, University of California, Los Angeles (Fowler Museum at UCLA) intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Allison Fischer-Olson, Fowler Museum at UCLA, Box 951549, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1549, email afischerolson@arts.ucla.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Fowler Museum at UCLA, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of 766 lots of cultural items have been requested for repatriation.
The two lots objects of cultural patrimony are two lots of groundstone. These cultural items were removed from the surface of CA-RIV-131, located in Reche Canyon, Riverside County, CA, in Spring 1953 by Dr. Clement W. Meighan during an official UCLA expedition. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA prior to June 1953 and comprise Accession 64. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians), these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano peoples and were taken from a site known to be within Serrano ancestral territory.
The 22 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are 14 lots of chipped stone, one lot of burned faunal bone, two lots of groundstone, and five lots of other stone materials. These cultural items were removed from the surface of CA-LAN-419, located in Lancaster, Los Angeles County, CA, in 1973 or 1974 by Eugene Stelzer. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA in 1975 and comprise Accession 140. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records. The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians also identified this site as within Chumash ancestral territory.
The 447 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are two lots of groundstone and 445 lots of chipped stone. These cultural items were excavated from CA-LAN-296 and CA-LAN-297, located in Fairmont Buttes, Los Angeles County, CA, in 1964 by Thomas C. Blackburn as part of a UCLA Archaeological Survey project. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA on September 12, 1966, and comprise Accession 503. Treatment history of these items is unknown.
In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records. The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians also identified this site as within Chumash ancestral territory.
The two lots of objects of cultural patrimony are two lots of ceramic sherds. These cultural items were removed from the surface of sites in Yucca Valley and Coyote Hole, San Bernardino County, CA, by unknown collectors between 1959-1961. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA prior to 1966 and comprise Accession 513. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians), these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano peoples and were taken from a site known to be within Serrano ancestral territory.
The one lot of objects of cultural patrimony is a crescent-shaped pendant made of pale green shale or soapstone. This cultural item, removed from CA-LAN-1252, located in Palmdale, Los Angeles County, CA, was donated by P. de Barros and G. Russell to the Fowler Museum at UCLA on January 23, 1986, and comprises Accession 712. Treatment history of this item is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records.
The one lot of objects of cultural patrimony is one lot of photographic negatives of petroglyphs at CA-SBR-281 in Black Canyon, San Bernardino County, CA. The collection history of these photographs is unknown but they were possibly received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA in 1986 and comprise Accession 825. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these photographs were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records.
The 125 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are 94 lots of stone/lithic fragments and 31 lots of chipped stone. These cultural items were removed from CA-LAN-1340, located in Agua Dulce, Los Angeles County, CA, by Greenwood and Associates around 1987-1988 ahead of proposed development. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA on an unknown date and comprise Accession 833. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records.
The 10 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are one lot of faunal bone and nine lots of historic materials (glass, metal, ceramics, leather). These cultural items were removed from CA-LAN-1431H, located in Swarthout Valley, Los Angeles County, CA, from a backhoe trench excavated by Dr. Ray Weldon (geologist, University of Oregon) in October 1988. Weldon was conducting research on the San Andreas Fault when he encountered this cultural deposit. The items were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA sometime after October 1988 and comprise Accession 837. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians), these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano peoples and were taken from a site known to be within Serrano ancestral territory.
The 156 lots of objects of cultural patrimony are five lots of groundstone and 151 lots of chipped stone. These cultural items were removed from CA-LAN-1252A, located in Palmdale, Los Angeles County, CA, by Chambers Group, Inc., in February 1990. They were received by the Fowler Museum at UCLA on April 12, 1990, and comprise Accession 866. Treatment history of these items is unknown. In consultation with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (also federally recognized as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) and non-federally recognized California Indian groups including the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, these items were identified as culturally affiliated with the Serrano and Tataviam peoples based on Tribal Traditional Knowledge, genealogical information, geographical location within Serrano and Tataviam ancestral territory, and ethnographic, historical, and archaeological records.

Determinations
The Fowler Museum at UCLA has determined that:
• The 766 lots of 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 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).

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Fowler Museum at UCLA 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 Fowler Museum at UCLA 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6840; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041701; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Field Museum, Chicago, IL

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Field Museum intends to repatriate a certain cultural item that meets the definition of an unassociated funerary object and that has a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural item in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice to June Carpenter, Field Museum, 1400 S Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, email jcarpenter@fieldmuseum.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of one cultural items has been requested for repatriation. The one unassociated funerary object is a shell gorget. The associated funerary object was excavated from Will County, Illinois at some time prior to December 7, 1948. The University of Chicago's Department of Anthropology donated the associated funerary object to the Field Museum on December 7, 1948. Based on the information available and the results of consultation, a relationship of shared group identity can be clearly and reasonable traced between the cultural item and the Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin; Hannahville Indian Community, Michigan; Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma; Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas; Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the Kickapoo Reservation in Kansas; Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma; Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (Fond du Lac Band; Mille Lacs Band); Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi, Michigan; Omaha Tribe of Nebraska; Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma; Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Michigan and Indiana; Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation; Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas and Nebraska; Sac & Fox Nation, Oklahoma; Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa; Shawnee Tribe; and the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska. There is no known presence of any potentially hazardous substances.

Determinations
The Field 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 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 connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. 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 item 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6834; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041695; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Case Western Reserve University has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to Jennifer Kangas Berendt, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106, email cwru-nagpra@case.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Case Western Reserve University, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
Human remains representing at least 29 individuals have been identified. The five associated funerary objects are footbones of Lynx canadensis. All remains were donated to the Haman-Todd Human Collection in the early Twentieth Century. Twenty-three individuals are notated as salvage archeology from Kelley's Island Lime and Transport Company in Erie County by Dr. T.W. Todd in 1915. Three individuals are notated as salvage archaeology from Cuyahoga County by Dr. T.W. Todd. Three individuals have no identifying documentation. The identity of the individuals is unknown. No known presence of potentially hazardous materials.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The Case Western Reserve University has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 29 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• The five 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 Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma; Shawnee Tribe; and the Wyandotte Nation.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Case Western Reserve University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Case Western Reserve University is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6838; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041699; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History, Pacific Grove, CA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of sacred objects and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Rachel M. Miller, Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History, 165 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA 93950, email miller@pgmuseum.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of 12 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 12 sacred objects are one buffalo horn powder horn, one buckskin dress, three pairs of moccasins, one beaded bag, one object with two buffalo horns and beaded fringe, one pair of leggings, one dance club, one awl case, one leather tassel and one beaded doll bonnet. According to available documentation these items were collected by individuals including William Chapman, Mrs. M.L. Reynolds, Almira Olmstead, Edgar Gross, Lydia Goodale Fogg, Joseph Shebl and George Higgins in South Dakota, Montana and Wisconsin in the first half of the twentieth century. There are no available records indicating whether or not any potentially hazardous substances were used to treat any of these cultural items.

Determinations
The Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History has determined that:
• The 12 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 connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History 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 Pacific Grove 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 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6826; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041687; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Museum of the Cherokee People, Cherokee, NC

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Museum of the Cherokee People (MotCP) has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to Evan Mathis, Museum of the Cherokee People, P.O. Box 1599, 589 Tsali Blvd., Cherokee, NC 28719, email evan.mathis@motcp.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Museum of the Cherokee People, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
Human ancestral remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified from an unknown archaeological site, accessioned as 2011.283. Four lots of funerary objects are present, including one lot of animal bones/bone fragments, one lot of ceramic pot sherds, one lot of charcoal, and one lot of lithics. After completing the consultation process with federally recognized Tribal Nations, this site is culturally affiliated with the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the Seminole Tribe of Florida (based on Southeastern iconography found on pottery sherds), and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. It is unknown when or by whom the individuals were removed, but the accession number indicates they were likely transferred to the Museum of the Cherokee People in 2011, where they have been housed since that time. To our knowledge, no hazardous substances were used to treat any of the human ancestral remains.
Human ancestral remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified from an unknown archaeological site, accessioned as 2011.392. Three lots of funerary objects were commingled with this individual, including one lot of ceramic pot sherds, one lot of lithics, and one lot of soil. After completing the consultation process with federally recognized Tribal Nations, this site is culturally affiliated with the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the Seminole Tribe of Florida (based on Southeastern iconography found on pottery sherds), and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. It is unknown when or by whom the individuals were removed, but the accession number indicates they were likely transferred to the Museum of the Cherokee People in 2011, where they have been housed since that time. To our knowledge, no hazardous substances were used to treat any of the human ancestral remains.
Human ancestral remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified from an unknown archaeological site, accessioned as 2011.360. One lot of funerary objects was commingled with this individual consisting of ceramic pot sherds. After completing the consultation process with federally recognized Tribal Nations, this site is culturally affiliated with the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the Seminole Tribe of Florida (based on Southeastern iconography found on pottery sherds), and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. It is unknown when or by whom the individuals were removed, but the accession number indicates they were likely transferred to the Museum of the Cherokee People in 2011, where they have been housed since that time. To our knowledge, no hazardous substances were used to treat any of the human ancestral remains.
Human ancestral remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified from an unknown archaeological site, accessioned as 2011.391. Four lots of funerary objects were commingled with this individual, including one lot of ceramic pot sherds, one lot of lithics, one lot of animal bones/bones fragments, and one lot of historic material. After completing the consultation process with federally recognized Tribal Nations, this site is culturally affiliated with the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the Seminole Tribe of Florida (based on Southeastern iconography found on pottery sherds), and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. It is unknown when or by whom the individuals were removed, but the accession number indicates they were likely transferred to the Museum of the Cherokee People in 2011, where they have been housed since that time. To our knowledge, no hazardous substances were used to treat any of the human ancestral remains.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The Museum of the Cherokee People has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of four individuals of Native American ancestry.
• The 12 lots of 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 Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Seminole Tribe of Florida; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Museum of the Cherokee People 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 Museum of the Cherokee People is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6836; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041697; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: California State Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the California State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has completed an inventory of associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice to Lisa Bright, Cultural Resources (South), California State Department of Transportation, 703 B Street, Marysville, CA 95901, email Lisa.Bright@dot.ca.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Caltrans, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
The 28,879 associated funerary objects are stone artifacts (mortars, pestles, milling slabs, hand stones and anvils), flaked stone (bifaces, projectile points, cores, scrapers, edge modified flakes and debitage), faunal bone, including bone ornaments and awls, shell beads, stone pendants, perforated stone discs, tabular sandstone artifacts, worked pieces of red ochre, quartz crystals and charmstones. The associated funerary objects were recovered during archaeological investigations in support of Caltrans YOL 16 Safety Improvements Project from CA-YOL-125, in Yolo County, California, between the community of Brooks and Interstate 505. Accession 507 was created during Phase II investigations (December 2003-February 2005), and Accession 508 was created during the PHIII data recovery. No potentially hazardous substances were used to treat any of the associated funerary objects.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The California Department of Transportation has determined that:
• The 28,879 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 Cachil DeHe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community of the Colusa Rancheria, California; Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation of the Cortina Rancheria ( previously listed as Kletsel Dehe Band of Wintun Indians); and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, California.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the California Department of Transportation 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 California Department of Transportation 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6825; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041686; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion Amendment: S'edav Va'aki Museum, City of Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice; amendment.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the S'edav Va'aki Museum (formerly Pueblo Grande Museum), City of Phoenix has amended a notice of inventory completion published in the Federal Register on February 8, 2019. This notice amends the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations with cultural affiliation.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects to Lindsey Vogel-Teeter, S'edav Va'aki Museum, 4619 East Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034, email lindsey.vogel-teeter@phoenix.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 S'edav Va'aki Museum, City of Phoenix, 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.

Amendment
This notice amends the determination of cultural affiliation published in a notice of inventory completion in the Federal Register (84 FR 2924, February 8, 2019). Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in the original notice of inventory completion has not occurred.

Determinations
The S'edav Va'aki Museum has determined that:
• There is a connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in the original notice and the Ak-Chin Indian Community; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Pueblo of Acoma, New Mexico; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'Odham Nation of Arizona; and the Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico.

Requests for Repatriation
Written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in the original 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 the original notice to a requestor may occur on or after February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the S'edav Va'aki Museum, City of Phoenix 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 S'edav Va'aki Museum, City of Phoenix 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6829; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041690; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University (PMAE) has completed an inventory of human remains and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice. The human remains were collected at the Sherman Institute, Riverside County, CA.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains in this notice to Jane Pickering, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, 11 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138, email jpickering@fas.harvard.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.

Abstract of Information Available
Based on the information available, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was collected at the Sherman Institute, Riverside County, CA. The human remains are hair clippings collected from one individual who was recorded as being 22 years old and identified as “Mission.” Samuel H. Gilliam took the hair clippings at the Sherman Institute between 1930 and 1933. Gilliam sent the hair clippings to George Woodbury, who donated the hair clippings to the PMAE in 1935. No associated funerary objects are present.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The PMAE has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the Mesa Grande Reservation, California.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the PMAE must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The PMAE is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribe identified in this notice.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6832; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041693; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Wilson Museum, Castine, ME

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Wilson Museum intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of sacred objects and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Abby Dunham, Wilson Museum, PO Box 196, 120 Perkins Street, Castine, ME 04421, email repatriation@wilsonmuseum.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Wilson 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of eight cultural items has been requested for repatriation consisting of eight sacred objects.
One sacred object is a pair of beaded moccasins acquired by Helen Bemis Hovey in Arizona ca. 1910-1920, donated to the museum by Nancy Angers in 1985.
One sacred object is a pair of beaded and quilled hide medicine bags acquired by Helen Bemis Hovey in Arizona ca. 1910-1920, donated by Nancy Angers in 1985.
One sacred object is a quilled and beaded cradle hood acquired by Helen Bemis Hovey in Arizona ca. 1910-1920, donated by Nancy Angers in 1985.
Two sacred objects are beaded cradleboard covers, possibly acquired by Dr. Carlotta Maury ca. 1893 at an unknown location in the Plains region.
One sacred object is a hide and horsehair rattle, collected by an unknown individual at an unknown date and location, identified in museum records as “Plains Indian (Sioux).”
One sacred object is a beaded and quilled hide pipe bag, collected by an unknown individual at an unknown date and location.
One sacred object is a beaded and quilled knife sheath acquired by Helen Bemis Hovey in Arizona ca. 1910-1920, donated by Nancy Angers in 1985.

Determinations
The Wilson Museum has determined that:
• The eight 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 connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Wilson 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 Wilson 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6831; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041692; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Sinclair Community College, Dayton, OH

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Sinclair Community College intends to repatriate a certain cultural item that meets the definition of a sacred object and that has a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural item in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural item in this notice to Rena Sebor and Amanda Darrah, Sinclair Community College, 444 West Third Street, Dayton, OH 45402, email rena.sebor@sinclair.edu and amanda.darrah@sinclair.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Sinclair Community College, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The one sacred object is a Medicine Face of the Haudenosaunee, a wooden mask with long horsehair. The side of the face is etched with a number: 2865-17-40. A collection of indigenous works was donated to Sinclair Community College by Citizens Federal Savings & Loan in 1987 including the mask. The works were displayed in the bank's lobby prior to the donation. Additional provenance is unknown.

Determinations
The Sinclair Community College has determined that:
• The one sacred object 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 connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Onondaga Nation.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Sinclair Community College must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the cultural item are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Sinclair Community College 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6828; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041689; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and/or objects of cultural patrimony and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Ruzel Benedicto Ednalino, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, email ruzel.b.ednalino@usace.army.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of 182 cultural items from site CA-MEN-545 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 182 unassociated funerary objects are: one chert biface, one chert blade, one chert chopper, two chert cores, three basalt flakes, 100 chert flakes, 38 lithic flakes, 15 obsidian flakes, three handstones, two chert projectile points, eight obsidian projectile points, one piece of rubber, five chert scrapers, and two stones. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 372 cultural items from site CA-MEN-546 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 372 unassociated funerary objects are: nine charcoal samples (six have not yet been located), four chert cobbles, two chert cores, two pieces of basalt debitage, 195 pieces of chert debitage, two pieces of obsidian debitage, 56 chert flakes, five obsidian flakes (four have not yet been located), two pieces of glass, nine pieces of groundstone, 62 pieces of basalt groundstone, 17 pieces of sandstone groundstone, four chert projectile points, two chert scrapers, and one tool. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 11 cultural items from site CA-MEN-551 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 11 unassociated funerary objects are: one charcoal sample, one piece of groundstone, one piece of basalt groundstone, three pieces of leather, three shell fragments, and two pieces of burned wood. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 39 cultural items from site CA-MEN-553 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 39 unassociated funerary objects are: one obsidian biface, 24 chert flakes, three obsidian flakes, one handstone, two chert projectile points, seven obsidian projectile points, and one chert scraper. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 477 cultural items from site CA-MEN-555 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 477 sacred objects are: one chert biface, 63 pieces of charcoal, one chert core, 170 pieces of chert debitage (143 have not yet been located), 14 faunal remains (two have not yet been located), 95 chert flakes (41 have not yet been located), one obsidian flake, seven flotation samples, 103 pieces of groundstone (23 have not yet been located), one chert projectile point, one obsidian projectile point, 17 pieces of fire cracked rock (17 have not yet been located), one shell fragment, and two fragments of wood. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of one cultural item from site CA-MEN-588 or CA-MEN-589 in Mendocino County, CA has been requested for repatriation. The one unassociated funerary object is an obsidian projectile point. This cultural item is currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 20 cultural items from site CA-MEN-1137 in Mendocino County, CA have been requested for repatriation. The 20 unassociated funerary objects are two abalone shell fragments and 18 faunal remains. The cultural items were likely removed during archaeological survey and excavations in the 1960s. These cultural items are currently located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA.
A total of 47 cultural items from unknown sites in Mendocino County, CA that are currently housed at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, CA have been requested for repatriation. The unassociated funerary objects are: one chert biface, 15 pieces of charcoal, 11 pieces of chert debitage, 12 faunal remains, one chert flake, five pieces of groundstone (have not yet been located), one stone mortar, and one obsidian projectile point.
A total of seven cultural items from unknown sites in Mendocino County, CA that are currently housed at San Francisco State University in San Francisco, CA have been requested for repatriation. The seven unassociated funerary objects are: one obsidian biface, one obsidian chopper, three obsidian projectile points, and two chert unifaces. These cultural items were likely removed during archaeological survey at the Coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino in the mid-to-late 1950s.
To our knowledge, the cultural items described herein have not been treated with any known hazardous substances.

Determinations
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District has determined that:
• The 679 unassociated funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near human remains, and are connected, either at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony of a Native American culture according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization. The unassociated funerary objects have been identified by a preponderance of the evidence as related to human remains, specific individuals, or families, or removed from a specific burial site or burial area of an individual or individuals with cultural affiliation to an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.
• The 477 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 connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians of California.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District 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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6842; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041702; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, FL

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the University of Florida-Florida Museum of Natural History (FLMNH) intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to David Blackburn, University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History, 1659 Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611, email NagpraOffice@floridamuseum.ufl.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 FLMNH, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of approximately 144 cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The 144 unassociated funerary objects (83-13; A19949) include faceted glass beads in red, orange, blue, yellow and green of approximately 3.8x4mm in diameter, round purple and clear beads in 4x4mm, and opaque 4x5mm beads. The catalog records indicate that these beads were removed from a “modern Seminole burial around 1950” somewhere along Loop Road of Monroe County, although the exact location of the burial is unknown. They were transferred to the FLMNH from the University of Florida Department of Anthropology in 1977. There are no known hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. Through the process of consultation, the site has been determined to be culturally affiliated with the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Seminole Nation of Florida, and the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

Determinations
The FLMNH has determined that:
• The approximately 144 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 connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the FLMNH 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 FLMNH 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6835; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041696; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Hood Museum of Art has completed an inventory of associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the associated funerary objects in this notice to Jami C. Powell, Hood Museum of Art, 6 East Wheelock Street, Hanover, NH 03755, email hood.NAGPRA@dartmouth.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Hood Museum of Art, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
An associated funerary object has been identified. The one associated funerary object is a lot of wampum beads. The beads entered the collection with an ancestor prior to 1913 from an unknown source. The associated ancestor was published in a notice of inventory completion in the Federal Register on May 2, 1996 (61 FR 19635). The beads are kept in a small box labeled as being from a “Seminole Burial Ground” in “Oak Lodge,” FL, which is consistent with the notations regarding the associated ancestor. After entering the Dartmouth College collection, the beads were separated from their ancestor. During the re-inventory process, the beads were re-located in the museum collection by Hood Museum of Art staff and identified as being associated with the ancestor from “Oak Lodge.”
Associated funerary objects have been identified. The 43 associated funerary objects are pottery sherds, shells, and limestone. The funerary objects entered the Dartmouth College collection with an ancestor from an unknown source in 1927. The associated ancestor was published in a notice of inventory completion in the Federal Register on May 14, 2025 (90 FR 20500). The objects are accompanied by tags noting their removal from Hernandez Mound in Ormond, FL, a known burial site. After entering the Dartmouth College collection, the funerary objects were separated from their associated ancestor and recently identified as being associated with the Ormond, FL ancestor.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
The Hood Museum of Art has determined that:
• The 44 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 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians; Poarch Band of Creek Indians; Seminole Tribe of Florida; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; and The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Hood Museum of Art 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 Hood Museum of Art is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6823; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041684; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Alabama Department of Transportation, Montgomery, AL

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) has completed an inventory of human remains and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains in this notice to William B. Turner, Alabama Department of Transportation, 1409 Coliseum Blvd., Montgomery, AL 36110, email turnerw@dot.state.al.us.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 ALDOT, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
Human remains representing, at least, 10 individuals have been identified.

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

Determinations
The ALDOT has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 10 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the ALDOT 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 ALDOT is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6774; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041682; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC, and Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs and Northern Arizona University intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and/or objects of cultural patrimony and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Tamara Billie, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian School Road NW, Mailbox 44, Albuquerque, NM 87104, email tamara.billie@bia.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of two cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The one unassociated funerary object is a Cibola White Ware, Escavada Black-on-white, pottery pitcher. The pottery was transferred to Northern Arizona University by a citizen who purchased it at an estate sale in Lynchburg, Virginia. An associated note states that it came from the Dean Kinto Trading Post in Manuelito, New Mexico, and identified it as a “burial jug, Anasazi.” The note further states, “This is a burial jug (never used) which was washed out of an Indian grave and collected by a modern Indian to sell.” Manuelito, New Mexico, and nearby Chaco culture sites lie on Navajo Tribal Trust land. There is no evidence or record of the presence of any potentially hazardous substances used to treat this cultural item.
The one sacred object/object of cultural patrimony is a Navajo wooden re-making doll or figurine. The item was removed from Site AZ D-16-71 (NAU)/JUA 78.138 on Navajo Tribal Trust lands in 1978 by Northern Arizona University archaeologists conducting a fence line survey for the Navajo Hopi Joint Use Area, under contract to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. There is no evidence or record of the presence of any potentially hazardous substances used to treat this cultural item.

Determinations
The U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, has determined that:
• The one unassociated funerary object described in this notice is reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near human remains, and is connected, either at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony of a Native American culture according to the Native American traditional knowledge of a lineal descendant, Indian Tribe, or Native Hawaiian organization. The unassociated funerary 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 one sacred object/object of cultural patrimony described in this notice is, according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization, specific ceremonial objects needed by a traditional Native American religious leader for present-day adherents to practice traditional Native American religion, and have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group, including any constituent sub-group (such as a band, clan, lineage, ceremonial society, or other subdivision).
• There is a connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico, & Utah.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs 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 U.S Department of the Interior, 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 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6830; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041691; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Inventory Completion: Mercyhurst University, Erie, PA

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Mercyhurst University has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send written requests for repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to Anne Marjenin, Mercyhurst University, 501 East 38th Street, Erie, PA 16546, email nagpra@mercyhurst.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 Mercyhurst University, 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.

Abstract of Information Available
Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. The two associated funerary objects are a possible hive (soil, OH-HO-AFO-TIN-0001) and a lot of soil (OH-HO-AFO-TIN-0002). The individual (OH-HO-TIN-0001) was removed by Robert Goslin or Orlando Lehman in 1935 from Lehman Mound located in Hocking County, Ohio. On an unknown date, the individual was obtained by Raymond C. Vietzen (1907-1995). Vietzen, an avocational archaeologist, collector, and author, established the Indian Ridge Museum in Elyria, Ohio, and the Archaeological Society of Ohio (formerly the Ohio Indian Relic Collectors Society). The Indian Ridge Museum, founded in the 1930s, served as Vietzen's laboratory and repository, and it remained in operation until the mid-1990s. After Vietzen's death, the facility fell into disrepair, and most of the items he had acquired and housed at the museum were sold. In 1998, the Ohio Historical Society (presently the Ohio History Connection) removed ancestral human remains and some of the remaining items from the facility and temporarily housed them at the Ohio Historical Society. In October of 2003, these remains were transferred from the Ohio Historical Society to Mercyhurst College (presently Mercyhurst University).
While there is no record regarding potentially hazardous substances having been used to treat the human remains, an unidentified adhesive is present. It is unknown when the adhesive was applied. The human remains may have been treated with an unidentified preservative coating, consolidant, or sealant. It is unknown when this unidentified substance may have been applied.

Cultural Affiliation
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.

Determinations
Mercyhurst University has determined that:
• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• The two 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 Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the Bad River Reservation, Wisconsin; Bay Mills Indian Community, Michigan; Cayuga Nation; Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy's Reservation, Montana; Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Tribe of Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin; Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Michigan; Hannahville Indian Community, Michigan; Kaw Nation, Oklahoma; Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Michigan; Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas; Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the Kickapoo Reservation in Kansas; Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma; Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin; Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of the Lac du Flambeau Reservation of Wisconsin; Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Michigan; Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Michigan; Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Montana; Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Michigan; Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (Six component reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band); Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi, Michigan; Omaha Tribe of Nebraska; Oneida Indian Nation; Oneida Nation; Onondaga Nation; Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma; Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Michigan and Indiana; Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Ponca Tribe of Nebraska; Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation; Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin; Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, Minnesota; Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas and Nebraska; Sac & Fox Nation, Oklahoma; Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa; Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe; Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Michigan; Seneca Nation of Indians; Seneca-Cayuga Nation; Shawnee Tribe; Sokaogon Chippewa Community, Wisconsin; St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin; The Osage Nation; Tonawanda Band of Seneca; Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians of North Dakota; Tuscarora Nation; and the Wyandotte Nation.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Mercyhurst University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. Mercyhurst University is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and any other consulting parties.
Authority: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3003, and the implementing regulations, 43 CFR 10.10.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[N6837; NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0041698; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000]
Notice of Intended Repatriation: Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence, RI

AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design (“RISD Museum”, “RISD”), intends to repatriate certain cultural items that meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony and that have a cultural affiliation with the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations in this notice.

DATES:
Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice may occur on or after February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
Send additional written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to Joe Leduc or María Fernanda Mancera, Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, 20 North Main Street, Providence, RI 02903, email jleduc@risd.edu or mmancera@risd.edu.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 RISD 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.

Abstract of Information Available
A total of two cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The objects of cultural patrimony are a cooking basket and a necked jar. The first one features abstract banded designs, while the second exhibits a diamond rattlesnake pattern. The cooking basket entered the RISD Museum's collection as a gift from Mrs. Gustav Radeke from Providence, RI, in 1920, and was identified as being of Yokut origin. The necked jar was a gift from Mrs. Kenneth F. Wood of Barrington, RI, and was entered into the collection in 1943. It was catalogued as Tulare. There is no known presence of potentially hazardous substances in either of the objects of cultural patrimony.

Determinations
The RISD Museum has determined that:
• The two 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 connection between the cultural items described in this notice and the Tejon Indian Tribe.

Requests for Repatriation
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 February 6, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the RISD 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 RISD 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.
Dated: December 18, 2025.
Melanie O'Brien,

Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-739-740 and 731-TA-1716-1717 (Final)]
Thermoformed Molded Fiber Products From China and Vietnam; Determinations
On the basis of the record ^1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of thermoformed molded fiber products (TMFPs) from China and Vietnam, provided for in subheading 4823.70.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), and imports of the subject merchandise from China and Vietnam that have been found to be subsidized by the governments of China and Vietnam. 2 3
^1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
^2 90 FR 46787, 90 FR 46791, 90 FR 46800, and 90 FR 46805 (September 30, 2025).
^3 The Commission also finds that imports subject to Commerce's affirmative critical circumstances determination are likely to undermine seriously the remedial effect of the countervailing duty orders on TMFPs from Vietnam. Commissioner Johanson dissented with respect to the critical circumstances determination.

Background
The Commission instituted these investigations effective October 8, 2024, following receipt of petitions filed with the Commission and Commerce by American Molded Fiber Coalition, which is comprised of Genera Inc. (“Genera”), Vonore, Tennessee; Tellus Products, LLC (“Tellus”), Belle Glade, Florida; and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO (“USW”). The final phase of the investigations was scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of TMFPs from China and Vietnam were subsidized within the meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(b)) and sold at LTFV within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigations and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on May 12, 2025 (90 FR 23066, May 30, 2025, as revised in 90 FR 25642, June 17, 2025). ^4 The Commission conducted its hearing on September 30, 2025. All persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to participate.
^4 Due to the lapse in appropriations and ensuing cessation of Commission operations, the Commission tolled its schedule for this proceeding. The schedule was revised in a subsequent notice published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2025 (90 FR 52697).
The Commission made these determinations pursuant to §§ 705(b) and 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on January 5, 2025. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5964 (January 2026), entitled Thermoformed Molded Fiber Products from China and Vietnam: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-739-740 and 731-TA-1716-1717 (Final).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 5, 2026.
Susan Orndoff,

Supervisory Attorney.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1473]
Certain Skid-Steer Loaders, Compact Track Loaders, Excavators, Wheel Loaders, Dozers, and Components Thereof; Notice of Institution of Investigation

AGENCY:
U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on December 2, 2025, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Doosan Bobcat North America, Inc. of West Fargo, North Dakota. 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 skid-steer loaders, compact track loaders, excavators, wheel loaders, dozers, and components thereof by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,831,364 (“the '364 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,047,760 (“the '760 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,364,356 (“the '356 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 10,934,684 (“the '684 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order.

ADDRESSES:
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Orndoff, The Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone or (202) 205-1802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2025).
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on January 2, 2026, ordered that —
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-9, 11-15, and 17-20 of the '364 patent; claims 1-13 of the '760 patent; claims 1-12 of the '356 patent; and claims 1-13 and 15-19 of the '684 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “skid-steer loaders, compact track loaders, excavators, wheel loaders, dozers, and components thereof”;
(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Doosan Bobcat North America, Inc., 250 East Beaton Dr., West Fargo, ND 58078.
(b) The respondent is the following entity alleged to be in violation of section 337, and is the party upon which the complaint is to be served: Caterpillar, Inc., 5205 N O'Connor Blvd., Suite 100, Irving, TX 75039.
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondent in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of the respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 2, 2025.
Susan Orndoff,

Supervisory Attorney.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-627 and 629 and 731-TA-1458-1461 (Review)]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and Vietnam; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews

AGENCY:
United States International Trade Commission.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of expedited reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on utility scale wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and Vietnam would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.

DATES:
November 24, 2025

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laurel Schwartz (202) 205-2398, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server ( https://www.usitc.gov ). The public record for this proceeding may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background—On November 24, 2025, the Commission determined that the domestic party group response to its notice of institution (90 FR 28764, July 1, 2025) of the subject five-year reviews was adequate and that the respondent interested party group response was inadequate. The Commission did not find any other circumstances that would warrant conducting full reviews. ^1 Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would conduct expedited reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)).
^1 A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's website.
For further information concerning the conduct of these reviews and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).
Staff report—A staff report containing information concerning the subject matter of the reviews has been placed in the nonpublic record, and will be made available to persons on the Administrative Protective Order service list for these reviews on March 12, 2026. A public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to § 207.62(d)(4) of the Commission's rules.
Written submissions—As provided in § 207.62(d) of the Commission's rules, interested parties that are parties to the reviews and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of institution, ^2 and any party other than an interested party to the reviews may file written comments with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in the reviews. Comments are due on or before 5:15 p.m. on February 17, 2026 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to the five-year reviews nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the reviews by February 17, 2026. However, should the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) extend the time limit for its completion of the final results of its reviews, the deadline for comments (which may not contain new factual information) on Commerce's final results is three business days after the issuance of Commerce's results. If comments contain business proprietary information (BPI), they must conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on Filing Procedures, available on the Commission's website at https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's procedures with respect to filings.
^2 The Commission has found the responses submitted on behalf of Broadwind Heavy Fabrications, Inc. and Arcosa Wind Towers to be individually adequate. Comments from other interested parties will not be accepted ( see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)).
In accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.
Determination—The Commission has determined these reviews are extraordinarily complicated and therefore has determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B).
Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.62 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 5, 2026.
Susan Orndoff,

Supervisory Attorney.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1474]
Certain Screen Protectors, Screen Protector Systems, and Components Thereof; Notice of Institution of Investigation

AGENCY:
U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on December 3, 2025, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Superior Communications Inc. of Irwindale, California. 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 screen protectors, screen protector systems, and components thereof by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,931,823 (“the '823 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 10,021,818 (“the '818 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 10,399,315 (“the '315 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 11,155,067 (“the '067 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists or is in the process of being established as required by the applicable Federal Statute.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

ADDRESSES:
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Orndoff, The Office of Docket Services, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-1802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2025).
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on January 2, 2026, ordered that —
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-12 and 14-19 of the '823 patent; claims 1-8 and 11-20 of the '818 patent; claims 1-20 of the '315 patent; and claims 1-10 of the '067 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists or is in the process of being established as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “screen protector applicator systems, i.e., screen protectors used with application trays, screen protectors and application trays, screen protectors used with application machines, screen protectors and application machines, and components thereof”;
(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Superior Communications Inc., 5027 Irwindale Avenue, Suite 900, Irwindale, California 91706.
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:
Belkin International, Inc., 555 South Aviation Boulevard, Suite 180, El Segundo, California 90245-4852.
Belkin Inc., 555 South Aviation Boulevard, Suite 180, El Segundo, California 90245-4852.
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 2, 2025.
Susan Orndoff,

Supervisory Attorney.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation. No. 337-TA-1475]
Certain Bicycle Trainers and Components Thereof; Notice of Institution of Investigation

AGENCY:
U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on December 3, 2025, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Wahoo Fitness L.L.C. of Atlanta, Georgia. A supplement to the complaint was filed on December 17, 2025. The complaint, as supplemented, 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 bicycle trainers and components thereof by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,933,290 (“the '290 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 11,090,542 (“the '542 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 11,559,732 (“the '732 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 12,330,036 (“the '036 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order.

ADDRESSES:
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Orndoff, The Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-1802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2025).
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on January 2, 2026, ordered that —
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, and 14-16 of the '290 patent; claim 16 of the '542 patent; claims 1-4, 8-11, and 13-18 of the '732 patent; and claims 1-3 and 5-9 of the '036 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “fitness equipment known as bicycle trainers”;
(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Wahoo Fitness L.L.C., 90 W. Wieuca Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30342.
(b) The respondent is the following entity alleged to be in violation of section 337, and is the party upon which the complaint is to be served:
JetBlack Cycling Pty Ltd., 31 Walker Street, South Windsor, NSW, Australia.
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondent in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of the respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 2, 2026.
Susan Orndoff,

Supervisory Attorney.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
[Docket #OFCCP-2025-0100; OMB Control No. 1250-0004]
Proposed Renewal of Information Collection Request; U.S. Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs Recordkeeping Requirements—38 U.S.C. 4212 Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, as Amended

AGENCY:
Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Labor.

ACTION:
Notice; request for public comments.

SUMMARY:
The Department of Labor (DOL), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance request for comment to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). This request helps to ensure that: requested data can be provided in the desired format; reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized; collection instruments are clearly understood; and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is soliciting comments concerning its proposal to obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to renew the following information collection: “Recordkeeping Requirements—38 U.S.C. 4212 Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, As Amended” (OMB Control No. 1250-0004). The current OMB approval for this information collection expires on April 30, 2026.

DATES:
All comments must be received on or before March 9, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered.
Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments in the following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments for OFCCP-2025-0100. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket, with no changes. Because your comment will be made public, you are responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number or confidential business information.
• If your comment includes confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission.
Written/Paper Submissions: Submit written/paper submissions in the following way:
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Mail or visit DOL-OFCCP, Division of Policy and Program Development, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room C-3325, Washington, DC 20210.
• OFCCP will post your comment as well as any attachments, except for information submitted and marked as confidential, in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ashley Romanias, Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. Telephone: (202) 693-0101 or toll free at 1-800-397-6251. If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services. Copies of this notice may be obtained in alternative formats (large print, braille, audio recording) upon request by calling the numbers listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
OFCCP administers and enforces the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, as amended (VEVRAA). Under VEVRAA, as applied by regulation, a business with a federal contract of $200,000 or more is required to treat qualified individuals without discrimination based on their status as a protected veteran in all employment practices. Covered contractors are also required to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified protected veterans.

II. Desired Focus of Comments
OFCCP is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection. OFCCP is particularly interested in comments that:
• Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information has practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of OFCCP's estimate of the burden related to the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used in the estimate;
• Suggest methods to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Background documents related to this information collection request are available at https://regulations.gov. Questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

III. Current Actions
OFCCP seeks the approval of the extension of this information collection in order to carry out its responsibility to enforce VEVRAA. OFCCP has updated the number of respondents, responses, forms, and burden hours from the previous information collection request.
Agency: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.
Type of Review: Renewal of a currently approved collection.
Title of Collection: U.S. Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs Recordkeeping Requirements—38 U.S.C. 4212 Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, As Amended.
OMB Control Number: 1250-0004.
Affected Public: Business or other for profit; individuals.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 89,978 Contractor Establishments.
Frequency: On occasion.
Number of Responses: 89,978 Contractor Establishments.
Estimated Average Time per Response: 48.18 hours per Contractor Establishment.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,334,822.
Total Estimated Annual Other Cost Burden: $356,313 (operating and maintenance costs).
Forms: None.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection request; they will become a matter of public record and will be available at https://www.reginfo.gov.
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 4212.
Ashley Romanias,

Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2025-2161]
Duke Energy Corporation; Belews Creek; Early Site Permit Application

AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:
Notice; receipt.

SUMMARY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is providing public notice of receipt and availability of an application for an early site permit (ESP) from Duke Energy Corporation for the Belews Creek site located in Stokes County, North Carolina.

DATES:
The application for the ESP was received on December 30, 2025.

ADDRESSES:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2025-2161 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2025-2161. Address questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Bridget Curran; telephone: 301-415-1003; email: Bridget.Curran@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual(s) listed in the For Further Information Contact section of this document.
• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “Begin ADAMS Public Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-4737, or by email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. The Belews Creek Early Site Permit Application package is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML25364A004.
• NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Emmanuel Sayoc, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-4084; email: Emmanuel.Sayoc@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Discussion
On December 30, 2025, Duke Energy Corporation filed with the NRC, pursuant to Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act and part 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” an application for an ESP for the Belews Creek site located in Stokes County, North Carolina.
In accordance with subpart A of 10 CFR part 52, an applicant may seek an ESP separate from the filing of an application for a construction permit (CP) or combined license (COL). The ESP process allows resolution of issues relating to siting. At any time during the period of an ESP, the ESP holder may reference the ESP in an application for a CP or COL.

II. Further Information
The NRC will publish subsequent Federal Register notices addressing the acceptability of the tendered ESP application for docketing and provisions for participation of the public in the ESP process.
Dated: January 5, 2026.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michelle Hayes,

Chief, Licensing and Regulatory Infrastructure Branch, Division of New and Renewed Licenses, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No. 35849; File No. 812-15882]
Source Capital/DE/, et al.
January 2, 2026.

AGENCY:
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”).

ACTION:
Notice.
Notice of application for an order under sections 17(d) and 57(i) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.

Summary of Application:
Applicants request an order to permit certain business development companies (“BDCs”) and closed-end management investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each other and with certain affiliated investment entities.

Applicants:
Source Capital/DE/, First Pacific Advisors, LP, and certain of their affiliated entities as described in Schedule A to the application.

Filing Dates:
The application was filed on August 21, 2025.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:
An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing the SEC's Secretary at Secretarys-Office@sec.gov and serving the Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on January 27, 2026, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the Applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary at Secretarys-Office@sec.gov.

ADDRESSES:
The Commission: Secretarys-Office@sec.gov. Applicants: Eric Brown, Esq., Chief Legal Officer, First Pacific Advisers, LP, EBrown@fpa.com; Nicole M. Runyan, P.C., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Nicole.Runyan@kirkland.com.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adam Large, Senior Special Counsel or Thomas Ahmadifar, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
For Applicants' representations, legal analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' application, filed August 21, 2025, which may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the top of this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search field, on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/search/. You may also call the SEC's Office of Investor Education and Advocacy at (202) 551-8090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,

Deputy Secretary.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-104533; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2025-169]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Cboe One Fees
January 2, 2026.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) ^1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, ^2 notice is hereby given that on December 22, 2025, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BZX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
^1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
^2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BZX”) proposes to amend its fee schedule as it relates to Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Commission's website ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ), the Exchange's website ( https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/ ), and at the principal office of the Exchange.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to clarify how User ^3 Fees are credited to Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution ^4 Fees. ^5 By way of background, the Exchange's Cboe One Feed ^6 is a market data product that provides cost-effective, high-quality reference quotes and trade data for market participants looking for comprehensive, real time market data. The Cboe One Feed provides market participants a comprehensive, unified view of the market from all four Cboe equities exchanges: Cboe BYX Exchange, Incorporated (“BYX”), Cboe BZX Exchange, Incorporated (the “Exchange,” or “BZX”), Cboe EDGA Exchange, Incorporated (“EDGA”), and Cboe EDGX Exchange, Incorporated (“EDGX”) (collectively, “Affiliates” and together with the Exchange, “Cboe Equities Exchanges”).
^3 A User of an Exchange Market Data product is a natural person, a proprietorship, corporation, partnership, or entity, or device (computer or other automated service), that is entitled to receive Exchange data. See Cboe U.S. Equities Fee Schedules, BZX Equities, Market Data Fees, available at: https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
^4 An External Distributor of an Exchange Market Data product is a Distributor that receives the Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to a third party or one or more Users outside the Distributor's own entity. Id.
^5 The proposed fee changes will take effect on December 22, 2025.
^6 See “Cboe One Feed,” available at: https://www.cboe.com/market__services/us//cboe_one/.
Two versions of the Cboe One Feed are offered—Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium—allowing subscribers to select their preferred level of depth. Both versions provide subscribers with aggregated quote and trade updates for the Cboe Equities Exchanges. In addition to aggregated quote and trade data, the Cboe One Premium Feed also includes five levels of aggregate depth information for all four exchanges.
Currently, the Exchange charges External Distributors a monthly fee of $5,000 ^7 for Cboe One Summary, and a monthly fee of $12,500 ^8 for Cboe One Premium. The Exchange's fee schedule also currently provides External Distributors the ability to receive a credit against their External Distribution fees. Specifically, the fee schedule states, “Each External Distributor will be eligible to receive a credit against its monthly Distributor Fee for the Cboe One Feed equal to the amount of its monthly User Fees up to a maximum of the Distributor Fee for the Cboe One Feed.”
^7 See Cboe U.S. Equities Fee Schedules, BZX Equities, Market Data Fees, available at: https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
^8 Id.
However, as currently codified, it is unclear to subscribers and potential subscribers that their Cboe One Summary User Fees can be applied to either their Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. Accordingly, in order clarify the fee schedule the Exchange now wishes to amend the fee schedule to provide that: (i) Cboe One User Summary Fees can be applied to both Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees; and (ii) Cboe One Premium User Fees can only be applied to Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. By way of illustration, an External Distributor of Cboe One Summary who has $4,500 in Cboe One Summary User Fees would be able to credit those User Fees against their Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fee, and pay a net fee of $500— i.e., Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fee ($5000) Less the Cboe One Summary User Fees ($4500) = $500. Similarly, an External Distributor that subscribes to both Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium that has Cboe One Summary User Fees totaling $4,500 could also deduct their User Fees against their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee and pay a net fee of $8,000— i.e., $12,500 (Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee) minus $4,500 (Cboe One Summary User Fees) = $8,000. Finally, an External Distributor of Cboe One Premium who has Cboe One Premium User Fees totaling $10,000 could deduct such User Fees from their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee and pay a net fee of $2,500— i.e., $12,500 (Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee) minus $10,000 (Cboe One Premium User Fees) = $2,500.

2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. ^9 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) ^{10} requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) ^{11} requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, ^{12} which requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using its facilities.
^9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
^{10} 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
^{11} Id.
^{12} 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
The Exchange believes these proposed amendments to its fee schedule are reasonable because it will now be clearer to subscribers of a Cboe One Feed how their User Fees may be applied to their External Distribution Fees. As noted above, External Distributors of Cboe One Summary could end up paying reduced costs, or no costs at all, by applying their Cboe One Summary User Fees to their Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fees. Similarly, a Distributor that receives the Cboe One Premium Feed for External Distribution could end up paying reduced fees, or no fee at all, by applying their Cboe One Premium User Fees, or Cboe One Summary User Fees, to their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. As such, subscribers to Cboe One Summary may now be further incentivized to upgrade their Cboe One Summary subscriptions to Cboe One Premium, thereby benefiting their Users with the provision of not just aggregated trade and quotation information, but aggregated depth. Overall, the Exchange believes this clarifying change to its fee schedule will help to make high quality market data for the Cboe Equities Exchanges more readily available to a wider range of market participants.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes it is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to apply the credit to External Distributors only because, like the free 3-month credit, it is also intended to incentivize new External Distributors to enlist Users, including Non-Professional Users ^{13} such as retail investors, to subscribe to the Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium Feed, in an effort to broaden the products' distribution.
^{13} A “Non-Professional User” of an Exchange Market Data product is a natural person or qualifying trust that uses Data only for personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose and, for a natural person who works in the United States, is not: (i) registered or qualified in any capacity with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any state securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or any commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii) engaged as an “investment adviser” as that term is defined in Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether or not registered or qualified under that Act); or (iii) employed by a bank or other organization exempt from registration under federal or state securities laws to perform functions that would require registration or qualification if such functions were performed for an organization not so exempt; or, for a natural person who works outside of the United States, does not perform the same functions as would disqualify such person as a Non-Professional User if he or she worked in the United States. Supra note 7.
While this incentive is not available for Internal Distribution ^{14} of a Cboe One Feed, the Exchange believe it is appropriate as Internal Distributor have no Users outside of their own firm. Furthermore, External Distributors are subject to higher risks of launch as the data is provided outside of their own firms. For these reasons, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to provide this incentive to only External Distributors. The Exchange also notes that the External Distributor Fee credit for the Cboe One Feed also helps to ensure that the proposed credit for the Cboe One Feed will not cause the combined cost of subscribing to the each of the top, depth, and summary data feeds offered by the Cboe Equities Exchanges to be greater than the amount that would be charged to subscribed to the Cboe One Feed, thereby ensuring that vendors can.
^{14} An Internal Distributor of an Exchange Market Data product is a Distributor that receives the Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to one or more Users within the Distributor's own entity. Supra note 7.
Moreover, the proposed External Distribution Fee credit would not permit unfair discrimination because all of the Exchange's subscribers and market data vendors are eligible to qualify for such credit. Further, the Cboe One Feeds are distributed and purchased on a voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make these data products available. Accordingly, Distributors (including vendors) and Users can discontinue use at any time and for any reason, including due to an assessment of the reasonableness of fees charged. Further, the Exchange is not required to make any proprietary data products available or to offer any specific pricing alternatives to any customers.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange believes that the External Distribution Fee credit will enhance competition because doing so will better enable the Exchange to not incentivize subscriptions to equities data that is competitive with similar products offered by other exchanges, but will also provide pricing that is competitive as well. Namely, the Cboe One Feeds provide investors with an alternative for receiving market data that competes directly with similar market data products currently offered by the New York Stock Exchange ^{15} and the Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC. ^{16} In this regard, the fees for the Cboe One Feeds are constrained by competition, and the existence of alternatives to the Cboe One Feeds makes the External Distribution Fee credit essential a critical tool in enabling the Exchange to offer attractive pricing for its equities data.
^{15} See NYSE Best Quote & Trades, available at: https://www.nyse.com/data-products/catalog/nyse-bqt.
^{16} See Nasdaq Basic, available at: https://www.nasdaq.com/solutions/data/equities/nasdaq-basic.
Although the Cboe Equities Exchanges are the exclusive distributors of the individual data feeds from which certain data elements would be taken to create the Cboe One Feeds, the Exchange would not be the exclusive distributor of the aggregated and consolidated information that comprise the Cboe One Feed. Any entity that receives, or elects to receive, the underlying data feeds would be able to, if it so chooses, to create a data feed with the same information included in the Cboe One Feed and sell and distribute it to its clients so that it could be received by those clients as quickly as the Cboe One Feed. Moreover, the current Distribution Fees that the Exchanges charges for the Cboe One Feed are not less than the combined fee of subscribing to each individual data feed. In this regard, by enabling a vendor to apply their Cboe One Summary User Fees to their External Distribution Fees for their Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium subscription, the Exchange will be better positioned to make its Cboe One Feed more attractive to market participants that have available to them a variety of similar, and competitively priced products.
Moreover, the proposed External Distributor Fee credit will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As noted above, all of the Exchange's subscribers and market data vendors are eligible to qualify for such credit, and the Cboe One Feeds are distributed and purchased on a voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make these data products available. Distributors (including vendors) and Users can discontinue use at any time. Additionally, as also noted, while the credit applies only to External Distributors, the Exchange believes such distinction is appropriate because this pricing mechanism is designed to help incentivize and broaden external usage, and Internal Distributors only have internal users.
Overall, the Exchange considered the competitiveness of the. market for proprietary data and all of the implications of that competition. The Exchange believes that it has considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant factors in order to establish fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably discriminatory fees and an equitable allocation of fees among all users. The existence of alternatives to the Cboe One Feed, including the existing underlying feeds, consolidated data, and proprietary data from other sources, ensures that the Exchange cannot set unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably discriminatory, when vendors and subscribers can elect these alternatives or choose not to purchase a specific proprietary data product if its cost to purchase is not justified by the returns any particular vendor or subscriber would achieve through the purchase.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act ^{17} and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 ^{18} thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
^{17} 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
^{18} 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission's internet comment form ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-169 on the subject line.

Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-169. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the filing will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-169 and should be submitted on or before January 28, 2026.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. ^{19}
^{19} 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
Stephanie Fouse,

Assistant Secretary.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-104534; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2025-037]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Cboe One Fees
January 2, 2026.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) ^1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, ^2 notice is hereby given that on December 22, 2025, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BYX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
^1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
^2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BYX”) proposes to amend its fee schedule as it relates to Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Commission's website ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ), the Exchange's website ( https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/ ), and at the principal office of the Exchange.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to clarify how User ^3 Fees are credited to Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution ^4 Fees. ^5 By way of background, the Exchange's Cboe One Feed ^6 is a market data product that provides cost-effective, high-quality reference quotes and trade data for market participants looking for comprehensive, real time market data. The Cboe One Feed provides market participants a comprehensive, unified view of the market from all four Cboe equities exchanges: Cboe BYX Exchange, Incorporated (the “Exchange” or “BYX”), Cboe BZX Exchange, Incorporated (“BZX”), Cboe EDGA Exchange, Incorporated (“EDGA”), and Cboe EDGX Exchange, Incorporated (“EDGX”) (collectively, “Affiliates” and together with the Exchange, “Cboe Equities Exchanges”).
^3 A User of an Exchange Market Data product is a natural person, a proprietorship, corporation, partnership, or entity, or device (computer or other automated service), that is entitled to receive Exchange data. See Cboe U.S. Equities Fee Schedules, BYX Equities, Market Data Fees, available at: https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
^4 An External Distributor of an Exchange Market Data product is a Distributor that receives the Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to a third party or one or more Users outside the Distributor's own entity. Id.
^5 The proposed fee changes will take effect on December 22, 2025.
^6 See “Cboe One Feed,” available at: https://www.cboe.com/market_data_services/us/equities/cboe_one/.
Two versions of the Cboe One Feed are offered—Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium—allowing subscribers to select their preferred level of depth. Both versions provide subscribers with aggregated quote and trade updates for the Cboe Equities Exchanges. In addition to aggregated quote and trade data, the Cboe One Premium Feed also includes five levels of aggregate depth information for all four exchanges.
Currently, the Exchange charges External Distributors a monthly fee of $5,000 ^7 for Cboe One Summary, and a monthly fee of $12,500 ^8 for Cboe One Premium. The Exchange's fee schedule also currently provides External Distributors the ability to receive a credit against their External Distribution fees. Specifically, the fee schedule states, “Each External Distributor will be eligible to receive a credit against its monthly Distributor Fee for the Cboe One Feed equal to the amount of its monthly User Fees up to a maximum of the Distributor Fee for the Cboe One Feed.”
^7 See BYX Fee Schedule, available at: https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
^8 Id.
However, as currently codified, it is unclear to subscribers and potential subscribers that their Cboe One Summary User Fees can be applied to either their Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. Accordingly, in order clarify the fee schedule the Exchange now wishes to amend the fee schedule to provide that: (i) Cboe One User Summary Fees can be applied to both Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees; and (ii) Cboe One Premium User Fees can only be applied to Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. By way of illustration, an External Distributor of Cboe One Summary who has $4,500 in Cboe One Summary User Fees would be able to credit those User Fees against their Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fee, and pay a net fee of $500— i.e., Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fee ($5000) Less the Cboe One Summary User Fees ($4500) = $500. Similarly, an External Distributor that subscribes to both Cboe One Summary and Cboe One Premium that has Cboe One Summary User Fees totaling $4,500 could also deduct their User Fees against their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee and pay a net fee of $8,000— i.e., $12,500 (Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee) minus $4,500 (Cboe One Summary User Fees) = $8,000. Finally, an External Distributor of Cboe One Premium who has Cboe One Premium User Fees totaling $10,000 could deduct such User Fees from their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee and pay a net fee of $2,500— i.e., $12,500 (Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fee) minus $10,000 (Cboe One Premium User Fees) = $2,500.

2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. ^9 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) ^{10} requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) ^{11} requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, ^{12} which requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using its facilities.
^9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
^{10} 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
^{11} Id.
^{12} 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
The Exchange believes these proposed amendments to its fee schedule are reasonable because it will now be clearer to subscribers of a Cboe One Feed how their User Fees may be applied to their External Distribution Fees. As noted above, External Distributors of Cboe One Summary could end up paying reduced costs, or no costs at all, by applying their Cboe One Summary User Fees to their Cboe One Summary External Distribution Fees. Similarly, a Distributor that receives the Cboe One Premium Feed for External Distribution could end up paying reduced fees, or no fee at all, by applying their Cboe One Premium User Fees, or their Cboe One Summary Fees to their Cboe One Premium External Distribution Fees. As such, subscribers to Cboe One Summary may now be further incentivized to upgrade their Cboe One Summary subscriptions to Cboe One Premium, thereby benefiting their Users with the provision of not just aggregated trade and quotation information, but aggregated depth. Overall, the Exchange believes this clarifying change to its fee schedule will help to make high quality market data for the Cboe Equities Exchanges more readily available to a wider range of market participants.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes it is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to apply the credit to External Distributors only because, like the free 3-month credit, it is also intended to incentivize new External Distributors to enlist Users, including Non-Professional Users ^{13} such as retail investors, to subscribe to the Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium Feed, in an effort to broaden the products' distribution. While this incentive is not available for Internal Distribution ^{14} of a Cboe One Feed, the Exchange believe it is appropriate as Internal Distributor have no Users outside of their own firm. Furthermore, External Distributors are subject to higher risks of launch as the data is provided outside of their own firms. For these reasons, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to provide this incentive to only External Distributors. The Exchange also notes that the External Distributor Fee credit for the Cboe One Feed also helps to ensure that the proposed credit for the Cboe One Feed will not cause the combined cost of subscribing to the each of the top, depth, and summary data feeds offered by the Cboe Equities Exchanges to be greater than the amount that would be charged to subscribed to the Cboe One Feed, thereby ensuring that vendors can.
^{13} A “Non-Professional User” of an Exchange Market Data product is a natural person or qualifying trust that uses Data only for personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose and, for a natural person who works in the United States, is not: (i) registered or qualified in any capacity with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any state securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or any commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii) engaged as an “investment adviser” as that term is defined in Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether or not registered or qualified under that Act); or (iii) employed by a bank or other organization exempt from registration under federal or state securities laws to perform functions that would require registration or qualification if such functions were performed for an organization not so exempt; or, for a natural person who works outside of the United States, does not perform the same functions as would disqualify such person as a Non-Professional User if he or she worked in the United States. Supra note 7.
^{14} An Internal Distributor of an Exchange Market Data product is a Distributor that receives the Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to one or more Users within the Distributor's own entity. Supra note 7.
Moreover, the proposed External Distribution Fee credit would not permit unfair discrimination because all of the Exchange's subscribers and market data vendors are eligible to qualify for such credit. Further, the Cboe One Feeds are distributed and purchased on a voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make these data products available. Accordingly, Distributors (including vendors) and Users can discontinue use at any time and for any reason, including due to an assessment of the reasonableness of fees charged. Further, the Exchange is not required to make any proprietary data products available or to offer any specific pricing alternatives to any customers.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange believes that the External Distribution Fee credit will enhance competition because doing so will better enable the Exchange to not incentivize subscriptions to equities data that is competitive with similar products offered by other exchanges, but will also provide pricing that is competitive as well. Namely, the Cboe One Feeds provide investors with an alternative for receiving market data that competes directly with similar market data products currently offered by the New York Stock Exchange ^{15} and the Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC. ^{16} In this regard, the fees for the Cboe One Feeds are constrained by competition, and the existence of alternatives to the Cboe One Feeds makes the External Distribution Fee credit essential a critical tool in enabling the Exchange to offer attractive pricing for its equities data.
^{15} See NYSE Best Quote & Trades, available at: https://www.nyse.com/data-products/catalog/nyse-bqt.
^{16} See Nasdaq Basic, available at: https://www.nasdaq.com/solutions/data/equities/nasdaq-basic.
Although the Cboe Equities Exchanges are the exclusive distributors of the individual data feeds from which certain data elements would be taken to create the Cboe One Feeds, the Exchange would not be the exclusive distributor of the aggregated and consolidated information that comprise the Cboe One Feed. Any entity that receives, or elects to receive, the underlying data feeds would be able to, if it so chooses, to create a data feed with the same information included in the Cboe One Feed and sell and distribute it to its clients so that it could be received by those clients as quickly as the Cboe One Feed. Moreover, the current Distribution Fees that the Exchanges charges for the Cboe One Feed are not less than the combined fee of subscribing to each individual data feed. In this regard, by enabling a vendor to apply their Cboe One Summary User Fees to their External Distribution Fees for their Cboe One Summary or Cboe One Premium subscription, the Exchange will be better positioned to make its Cboe One Feed more attractive to market participants that have available to them a variety of similar, and competitively priced products.
Moreover, the proposed External Distributor Fee credit will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As noted above, all of the Exchange's subscribers and market data vendors are eligible to qualify for such credit, and the Cboe One Feeds are distributed and purchased on a voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make these data products available. Distributors (including vendors) and Users can discontinue use at any time. Additionally, as also noted, while the credit applies only to External Distributors, the Exchange believes such distinction is appropriate because this pricing mechanism is designed to help incentivize and broaden external usage, and Internal Distributors only have internal users.
Overall, the Exchange considered the competitiveness of the. market for proprietary data and all of the implications of that competition. The Exchange believes that it has considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant factors in order to establish fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably discriminatory fees and an equitable allocation of fees among all users. The existence of alternatives to the Cboe One Feed, including the existing underlying feeds, consolidated data, and proprietary data from other sources, ensures that the Exchange cannot set unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably discriminatory, when vendors and subscribers can elect these alternatives or choose not to purchase a specific proprietary data product if its cost to purchase is not justified by the returns any particular vendor or subscriber would achieve through the purchase.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act ^{17} and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 ^{18} thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
^{17} 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
^{18} 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission's internet comment form ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include file number SR-CboeBYX-2025-037 on the subject line.

Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBYX-2025-037. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website ( https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the filing will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBYX-2025-037 and should be submitted on or before January 28, 2026.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. ^{19}
^{19} 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
Stephanie Fouse,

Assistant Secretary.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No. 35856]
Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940
January 2, 2026.

AGENCY:
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”).

ACTION:
Notice of Applications for Deregistration under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940.
The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of November 2025. A copy of each application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the applicable file number listed below, or for an applicant using the Company name search field, on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/search/. You may also call the SEC's Office of Investor Education and Advocacy at (202) 551-8090. An order granting each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing the SEC's Secretary at Secretarys-Office@sec.gov and serving the relevant applicant with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is listed for the relevant applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a physical address is listed for the relevant applicant below. Hearing requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on January 27, 2026, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary at Secretarys-Office@sec.gov.

ADDRESSES:
The Commission: Secretarys-Office@sec.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shawn Davis, Assistant Director, at (202) 551-6413 or Chief Counsel's Office at (202) 551-6821; SEC, Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-8010.

DSS AmericaFirst Funds [File No. 811-22669]
Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On September 4, 2025, and October 15, 2025, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $56,755.98 incurred in connection with the liquidation were paid by the applicant.
Filing Date: The application was filed on October 22, 2025.
Applicant's Address: 275 Wiregrass Parkway, West Henrietta, New York 14586.

FT Vest Annual Hedged Equity Income Fund II [File No. 811-24063]
Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind.
Filing Date: The application was filed on September 11, 2025, and amended on December 03, 2025.
Applicant's Address: c/o UMB Fund, 235 West Galena Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53212.

Franklin Income Opportunities Fund [File No. 811-23767]
Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind.
Filing Date: The application was filed on August 8, 2025.
Applicant's Address: 620 Eighth Avenue, 47th Floor, New York, New York 10018.

Selected International Fund, INC [File No. 811-01533]
Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to Davis International Fund, an authorized series of Davis New York Venture Fund, Inc., and on November 7, 2025 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $87,504.46 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by the acquiring fund's investment adviser.
Filing Date: The application was filed on November 19, 2025.
Applicant's Address: 2949 East Elvira Road, Suite 101, Tuscon, Arizona 85756.

Matrix Advisors Value Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-03758]
Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to Matrix Advisors Value ETF, and on February 12, 2025 made a final distribution to its shareholders pro rata based on share ownership. Expenses of $129,479.25 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by the applicant's investment adviser.
Filing Dates: The application was filed on September 11, 2025 and amended on December 10, 2025.
Applicant's Address: 10 Bank Street, Suite 590 White Plains, New York 10606.

Morgan Creek Global Equity Long/Short Institutional Fund [File No. 811-22461]
Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On July 1, 2022, April 1, 2023, and April 1, 2024, applicant made liquidating distributions to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $24,103 incurred in connection with the liquidation were paid by the applicant. Applicant also has retained $3,469,247 for the purpose of paying outstanding debts, and shareholder amounts due post liquidation.
Filing Date: The application was filed on June 5, 2025.
Applicant's Address: 301 West Barbee Chapel Road, Suite 200, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27517.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,

Deputy Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
[Docket No. MARAD-2025-1192]
Use of Foreign-Built Small Passenger Vessel in United States Coastwise Trade, S/V SEAS THE MOMENT

AGENCY:
Maritime Administration (MARAD), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION:
Notice and request for comments.

SUMMARY:
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by MARAD, is authorized to make determinations regarding the coastwise use of foreign built; certain U.S. built; and U.S. and foreign rebuilt vessels that solely carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. MARAD has received such a determination request and is publishing this notice to solicit comments to assist with determining whether the proposed use of the vessel set forth in the request would have an adverse effect on U.S. vessel builders or U.S. coastwise trade businesses that use U.S.-built vessels in those businesses. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a description of the proposed service, is in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.

DATES:
Submit comments on or before February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2025-1192 by any one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Search the above DOT Docket Number and follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility is in the West Building, Ground Floor of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Docket Management Facility location address is U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays.

Note:
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include the DOT Docket Number, your name and a mailing address, an email address or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and specific DOT Docket Number. All comments received will be posted without change to the docket at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments, or to submit comments that are confidential in nature, see the section entitled Public Participation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia Hagerty, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Mail Stop 2, MAR-620, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-5400. Email: smallvessels@dot.gov .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 12121(b), the U.S. Coast Guard may issue a certificate of documentation with a coastwise trade endorsement for eligible, small passenger vessels authorized to carry no more than 12 passengers for hire if MARAD, after notice and an opportunity for public comment, determines the use of the small passenger vessel in the coastwise trade will not adversely affect United States vessel builders or the coastwise trade business of any person that employs vessels built in the United States in that business. ^1
^1 The U.S. Coast Guard and MARAD have authority under 46 U.S.C. 12121(b) through the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, respectively.
MARAD has received an eligibility determination request. Further details about the requester's vessel and its proposed operations may be found in the determination request posted in the DOT Docket Number listed in the ADDRESSES section above at https://www.regulations.gov. Interested parties may comment on the undue adverse effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or coastwise trade businesses in the U.S. that employ U.S.-built vessels in those businesses. Comments should refer to the vessel name, state the commenter's interest in the request, and demonstrate, with supporting documentation, the undue adverse effect on U.S. vessel builders and coastwise trade businesses.

Public Participation

How do I submit comments?
Please submit comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled ADDRESSES . It may take a few hours or even days for comments to be reflected on the docket. Comments must be written in English. Provide concise comments and attach additional documents as necessary. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.

Where do I go to read public comments, and find supporting information?
The docket online is located at https://www.regulations.gov, keyword search the DOT Docket Number list in the ADDRESSES section above or visit the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES for hours of operation). Please periodically check the Docket for new submissions and supporting material.

Will my comments be made available to the public?
Yes. Your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.

May I submit comments confidentially?
You may request that MARAD treat your comments as commercially confidential by submitting them to SmallVessels@dot.gov. Include in the email subject heading “Contains Confidential Commercial Information” or “Contains CCI” and state in your submission, with specificity, the basis for any such confidential treatment highlighting the CCI portions. If possible, please provide a summary of your submission that can be made available to the public.
If MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.

Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). For information on DOT's compliance with the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
(Authority: 46 U.S.C. 12121, 49 CFR 1.93(a))
By Order of the Maritime Administration.
T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr.,

Secretary, Maritime Administration.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
[Docket No. MARAD-2025-1191]
Request Notice: Use of Foreign-built Small Passenger Vessel in United States Coastwise Trade, M/V FORTUNA

AGENCY:
Maritime Administration (MARAD), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION:
Notice and request for comments.

SUMMARY:
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by MARAD, is authorized to make determinations regarding the coastwise use of foreign built; certain U.S. built; and U.S. and foreign rebuilt vessels that solely carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. MARAD has received such a determination request and is publishing this notice to solicit comments to assist with determining whether the proposed use of the vessel set forth in the request would have an adverse effect on U.S. vessel builders or U.S. coastwise trade businesses that use U.S.-built vessels in those businesses. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a description of the proposed service, is in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.

DATES:
Submit comments on or before February 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES:
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2025-1191 by any one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Search the above DOT Docket Number and follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility is in the West Building, Ground Floor of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Docket Management Facility location address is U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays.

Note:
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include the DOT Docket Number, your name and a mailing address, an email address or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and specific DOT Docket Number. All comments received will be posted without change to the docket at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments, or to submit comments that are confidential in nature, see the section entitled Public Participation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia Hagerty, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Mail Stop 2, MAR-620, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-5400. Email: smallvessels@dot.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 12121(b), the U.S. Coast Guard may issue a certificate of documentation with a coastwise trade endorsement for eligible, small passenger vessels authorized to carry no more than 12 passengers for hire if MARAD, after notice and an opportunity for public comment, determines the use of the small passenger vessel in the coastwise trade will not adversely affect United States vessel builders or the coastwise trade business of any person that employs vessels built in the United States in that business. ^1
^1 The U.S. Coast Guard and MARAD have authority under 46 U.S.C. 12121(b) through the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, respectively.
MARAD has received an eligibility determination request. Further details about the requester's vessel and its proposed operations may be found in the determination request posted in the DOT Docket Number listed in the ADDRESSES section above at https://www.regulations.gov. Interested parties may comment on the undue adverse effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or coastwise trade businesses in the U.S. that employ U.S.-built vessels in those businesses. Comments should refer to the vessel name, state the commenter's interest in the request, and demonstrate, with supporting documentation, the undue adverse effect on U.S. vessel builders and coastwise trade businesses.

Public Participation

How do I submit comments?
Please submit comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled ADDRESSES . It may take a few hours or even days for comments to be reflected on the docket. Comments must be written in English. Provide concise comments and attach additional documents as necessary. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.

Where do I go to read public comments, and find supporting information?
The docket online is located at https://www.regulations.gov, keyword search the DOT Docket Number list in the ADDRESSES section above or visit the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES for hours of operation). Please periodically check the Docket for new submissions and supporting material.

Will my comments be made available to the public?
Yes. Your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.

May I submit comments confidentially?
You may request that MARAD treat your comments as commercially confidential by submitting them to SmallVessels@dot.gov. Include in the email subject heading “Contains Confidential Commercial Information” or “Contains CCI” and state in your submission, with specificity, the basis for any such confidential treatment highlighting the CCI portions. If possible, please provide a summary of your submission that can be made available to the public.
If MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.

Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). For information on DOT's compliance with the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
(Authority: 46 U.S.C. 12121, 49 CFR 1.93(a))
By Order of the Maritime Administration.
T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr.,

Secretary, Maritime Administration.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of Foreign Assets Control
Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions

AGENCY:
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing updates to the identifying information of one or more persons currently included in OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List).

DATES:
This action was issued on January 2, 2026. See Supplementary Information section for effective dates.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
OFAC: Associate Director for Global Targeting, 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance, 202-622-2490; or https://ofac.treasury.gov/contact-ofac.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability
The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website: https://ofac.treasury.gov.

Notice of OFAC Actions
On January 2, 2026, OFAC updated the entry on the SDN List for the following person, whose property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction continue to be blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed below.

Individual
1. DIANA, Cristian, Isernia, Italy; DOB 03 Oct 1974; POB Isernia, Italy; nationality Italy; Gender Male; Passport E619547 (Italy) (individual) [ILLICIT-DRUGS-EO14059] (Linked To: STILE ITALIANO S.R.L.; Linked To: WINDROSE TACTICAL SOLUTIONS S.R.L.S.).
The listing for the individual now appears as follows:
DIANA, Cristian, Pordenone, Italy; DOB 24 Nov 1971; POB Pordenone, Italy; nationality Italy; Gender Male; Passport YB8215970 (Italy); Tax ID No. DNICST71S24G888J (Italy) (individual) [ILLICIT-DRUGS-EO14059] (Linked To: STILE ITALIANO S.R.L.; Linked To: WINDROSE TACTICAL SOLUTIONS S.R.L.S.).
Dated: January 2, 2026.
Lisa M. Palluconi,

Deputy Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Cooperative Studies Scientific Evaluation Committee, Notice of Meeting
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Ch. 10, that Cooperative Studies Scientific Evaluation Committee (Committee) will hold its virtual meeting on January 23, 2026, via Microsoft Teams, from 1:00 p.m.-3:45 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
The Committee provides expert advice on VA cooperative studies, multi-site clinical research activities, and policies related to conducting and managing these efforts. The first 30 minutes of the meeting (approximately) will be open to the public as the Committee discusses administrative matters and the general status of the program. The remaining portion of the meeting will be closed to the public as the Committee reviews, discusses, and evaluates research and development applications.
During the closed portion of the meeting, the Committee's discussions and recommendations will address the qualifications of the personnel conducting the studies; staff and consultant critiques of research proposals and similar documents; and the medical records of study subjects, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Additionally, premature disclosure of research information to the public could significantly obstruct implementation of approved research activities. Therefore, portions of the Committee meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)(6) and (9)(B).
The Committee will not accept oral comments from the public for the open portion of the meeting. Members of the public who wish to attend the open teleconference should call 872-701-0185, conference ID 593 392 899#. Those who plan to attend, would like additional information, or would like to submit written comments should contact David Burnaska, Program Manager, Cooperative Studies Program (14RD), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, at David.Burnaska@va.gov.
Dated: January 5, 2026.
Jelessa M. Burney,

Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Joint Biomedical Laboratory (BL) and Clinical Science (CS) Research and Development Services Scientific Merit Review Board, Notice of Meeting
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Ch. 10, that a meeting of the Joint Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development (BLR&D) and Clinical Science Research and Development (CSR&D) Services Scientific Merit Review Board (Board) will be held January 13, 2026, from 3:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), via Microsoft Teams. The meeting will be open to the public from 3:00 p.m.-3:30 p.m. EST. The remained of the meeting, from 3:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m. EST, will be closed to the public and used for scientific review and discussion, examination of, and reference to the research applications. Discussions will involve staff and consultant critiques of research proposals. Discussions will also cover the scientific merit of each proposal and the qualifications of the personnel conducting the studies, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Additionally, premature disclosure of research information could significantly obstruct implementation of proposed agency action regarding the research proposals. Therefore, portions of the Board meeting will be closed is in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (6) and (9)(B).
The objective of the Board is to provide for the fair and equitable selection of the most meritorious research projects for support by VA research funds and to offer advice for research program officials on program priorities and policies. The ultimate objective of the Board is to ensure the high quality and mission relevance of VA's BL/CS Research and Development programs.
Board members will advise the Directors of the BL/CS Research Services, as well as the Acting Chief Research and Development Officer, on the scientific and technical merit, mission relevance, and protection of human subjects of the proposals submitted to BL/CS. The Board does not consider grants, contracts, or other forms of extramural research.
Members of the public may attend the open portion of the meeting from 3:00 p.m.-3:30 p.m. EST, via Microsoft Teams (in listen-only mode, as the time-limited agenda does not allow for public comment or presentations). To attend the open portion of the meeting, the public may dial the Microsoft Teams phone number 1-872-701-0185 and enter the meeting access code 354 407 531#.
Written comments from members of the public should be sent to Michael R. Burgio, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, Office of Research and Development, Department of Veterans Affairs (14RD), 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, or to Michael.Burgio@va.gov, at least five (5) days before the meeting. The written public comments will be shared with the Board members. The public may not attend the closed portion of the meeting.
Dated: January 5, 2026.
Jelessa M. Burney,

Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.