On March 11, 2021, Commerce published the Order in the Federal Register . 1 On February 2, 2026, Commerce published the notice of initiation of this first sunset review of the Order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act). 2

On February 17, 2026, Commerce received a timely and complete notice of intent to participate in the sunset review from a domestic interested party within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 3 The domestic interested party claimed interested party status within the meaning of section 771(9)(C) of the Act as a producer in the United States of the domestic like product. 4 On February 20, 2026, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that it had received a notice of intent to participate from the domestic interested party. 5

On March 4, 2026, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i), the domestic interested party filed a timely and adequate substantive response. 6 Commerce did not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party. On March 27, 2026, Commerce notified the ITC that it did not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party. 7 As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), Commerce is conducting an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the Order.

The product covered by this Order is Difluoromethane (R-32) from the China. For a full description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decisions Memorandum. 8

On February 15, 2023, Commerce published its Final Results in the 2020-2021 AD administrative review of xanthan gum from China. 1 Commerce calculated a weighted average dumping margin of 17.36 percent for its sole mandatory respondent, Fufeng. 2 Commerce also assigned Fufeng's weighted average dumping margin to eligible separate rate entities ( i.e., Meihua). 3

Fufeng and Meihua appealed Commerce's Final Results. On December 16, 2024, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce, ordering Commerce to: (1) explain its determination to directly value energy; and (2) failure to address arguments regarding the Harmonized System (HS) subheading for coal. 4

In its first remand redetermination, issued on May 5, 2025, Commerce found that: (1) its direct valuation of Fufeng's energy factors of production was appropriate; and (2) Commerce's decision to value coal using HS 2701.12.9000 was proper. 5 The CIT sustained Commerce's direct valuation of energy and remanded Commerce's decision to value coal using HS 2701.12.9000 for a second time. 6

In its final remand redetermination, issued on April 30, 2026, Commerce found HS 2701.19 rather than 2701.12.9000 was the proper HS subheading for valuing Fufeng's coal factor of production (FOP). 7 Commerce's application of HS 2701.19 when valuing the coal factor of production (FOP) reduced Fufeng's weighed average dumping margin to 0.00 percent. 8 The CIT sustained Commerce's final redetermination. 9

In its decision in Timken, 10 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 11 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's May 12, 2026, judgment constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending its Final Results with respect to Fufeng, and Meihua as follows:

We note that Jianlong Biotechnology Co., Ltd.'s (formerly, Inner Mongolia Jianlong Biochemical Co., Ltd) (Jianlong), and Deosen Biochemical (Ordos) Ltd.'s, Deosen Biochemical Ltd.'s (collectively, Deosen) rates of 17.36 percent remain unchanged from the Final Results as their rates were not subject to litigation.

Because Fufeng and Meihua have a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., there have been final results published in a subsequent administrative review, we will not issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). This notice will not affect the current cash deposit rate.

At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from liquidating entries that: were exported by Fufeng, and Meihua and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.

In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise exported by Fufeng and Meihua in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. Where an import-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, 12 we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

On March 4, 2021, Commerce published the Order in the Federal Register . 1 On February 2, 2026, Commerce published the notice of initiation of this first sunset review of the Order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act). 2 On February 17, 2026, Commerce received a timely and complete notice of intent to participate in the sunset review for domestic interested parties within the deadline specified in the 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 3 The domestic interested parties claimed the interested party status within the meaning of section 771(9)(C) of the Act as a domestic producer of vertical shaft engines. 4 On February 24. 2026, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that it had received a notice of intent to participate from the domestic interested parties. 5

On March 4, 2026, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i), domestic interested parties filed a timely and adequate substantive response. 6 Commerce did not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party. On March 27, 2026, Commerce notified the ITC that it did not receive substantive response from any respondent interested parties. 7 As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), Commerce is conducting an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the Order.

The product covered by these Order is certain large vertical shaft engines between 225cc and 999cc, and parts thereof from China. For the full description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decisions Memorandum. 8

A complete discussion of all issues raised in this sunset review, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping in the event of revocation of the Order and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the Order were to be revoked, is provided in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 9 A list of the topics discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached in the Appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be directly accessed at https://access.trade.gov/frnotices.

Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1), 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, Commerce determines that revocation of the Order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and that the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail would be weighted-average dumping margins up to 468.33 percent.

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

We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218 and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(5)(ii).

Evolutionarily Significant Unit: threatened, naturally produced, and artificially propagated.

The Yurok Tribe submitted a TRMP for review under the ESA Tribal 4(d) Rule. Under Section 4 of the ESA, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) is required to adopt such regulations as deemed necessary and advisable for the conservation of species listed as threatened. The ESA salmon and steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR 42422, July 10, 2000, as updated in 70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005) specifies categories of activities that contribute to the conservation of listed salmonids and sets criteria for such activities to qualify as limits on take prohibitions. The ESA Tribal 4(d) Rule (65 FR 42481, July 10, 2000) states that the take prohibitions of ESA Section 9 will not apply to a TRMP provided that the Secretary has determined that the TRMP will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery for the listed species (50 CFR 223.204(a)).

The Yurok Tribe's TRMP provides a framework through which tribal salmon fisheries can be implemented while meeting requirements specified under the ESA. The TRMP describes the proposed fisheries, establishes limits for harvest, and describes monitoring and reporting provisions associated with the fisheries. The TRMP management objective is for the Tribe to conduct fisheries in a manner that does not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of ESA-listed coho salmon.

NMFS has analyzed the effects of the TRMP on ESA-listed salmon and steelhead species and has concluded that the TRMP would not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of ESA-listed species, while providing for the proposed tribal harvest opportunities. Our determination depends upon implementation of all of the monitoring, evaluation, reporting tasks or assignments, and enforcement activities included in the TRMP, and that the fisheries stay within the impact limits described in the TRMP.

Prior to making a final determination on Tribal Plans, NMFS must take comments on its pending determination as to whether or not implementation of the plan will appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of ESA-listed salmonids (50 CFR 223.204(b)(3)). NMFS assessed the TRMP and prepared a Proposed Evaluation and Pending Determination (PEPD). The PEPD was posted on the NMFS website and a notice of availability was posted in the Federal Register on July 28, 2025 (90 FR 35512). The public comment period expired on August 27, 2026. We received one comment letter on the information contained in the PEPD, which is addressed in the final Evaluation and Recommended Determination (ERD). The PEPD and the final ERD are available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/tribal-resource-management-plan-trmp-yurok-tribe.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.

Title: Native American Tribal Insignia Database.

OMB Control Number: 0651-0048.

Abstract: The Trademark Law Treaty Implementation Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-330, 302, 112 Stat. 3071) requires the USPTO to study issues surrounding the protection of the official insignia of federally and state-recognized Native American tribes under trademark law. The USPTO conducted the study and presented a report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on November 30, 1999. 1 One of the recommendations made in the report was that the USPTO create and maintain an accurate and comprehensive database containing the official insignia of all federally and state-recognized Native American tribes. In accordance with this recommendation, the Senate Committee on Appropriations directed the USPTO to create this database. The USPTO published the final procedures for establishing and maintaining the tribal insignia database in the Federal Register on August 24, 2001 (66 FR 44603). 2

The USPTO database of official tribal insignias provides evidence of what a federally or state-recognized Native American tribe considers to be its official insignia. Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1052(a), bars the registration of marks that falsely suggest a connection with a non-sponsoring person or institution, including a Native American tribe. The database thereby assists trademark examining attorneys to evaluate applications for trademark registration by serving as a reference for determining the registrability of a mark that may falsely suggest a connection to the official insignia of a Native American tribe. The database, included within the trademark search system, is available to the public on the USPTO website, and includes an online help program for using the system. More information about the program is available on the website at https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/laws/native-american-tribal-insignia.

Tribes are not required to request that their official insignia be included in the database. The entry of an official insignia into the database does not confer any rights to the tribe that submitted the insignia, and entry is not the legal equivalent of registering the insignia as a trademark under 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq. The inclusion of an official tribal insignia in the database does not create any legal presumption of validity or priority, does not carry any of the benefits of federal trademark registration, and is not a determination as to whether a particular insignia would be refused registration as a trademark pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.

Requests from federally recognized tribes to enter an official insignia into the database must be submitted in writing and include: (1) a depiction of the insignia, including the name of the tribe and the correspondence address; (2) a copy of the tribal resolution adopting the insignia in question as the official insignia of the tribe; and (3) a statement, signed by an official with authority to bind the tribe, confirming that the insignia included with the request is identical to the official insignia adopted by the tribal resolution.

Requests from state-recognized tribes must also be in writing and include each of the three items described above that are submitted by federally recognized tribes. Additionally, requests from state-recognized tribes must include either: (a) a document issued by a state official that demonstrates the state's determination that the entity is a Native American tribe; or (b) a citation to a state statute designating the entity as a Native American tribe.

The USPTO then enters insignia that have been properly submitted by federally or state-recognized Native American tribes into the database and does not investigate whether the insignia is actually the official insignia of the tribe making the request.

This information collection includes the information the USPTO requires to enter an official insignia for a federally or state-recognized Native American tribe into a database of such insignia. There are no forms associated with this information collection.

Forms: None.

Type of Review: Extension and revision of a currently approved information collection.

Affected Public: State, local, and tribal governments.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

Frequency: On occasion.

Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 39 respondents.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 39 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: The USPTO estimates that the responses in this information collection will take the public approximately 1 hour to complete. This includes the time to gather the necessary information, create the document, and submit the completed item to the USPTO.

Estimated Total Annual Respondent Burden Hours: 39 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Respondent Non-hourly Cost Burden: $25.

Since the publication of the 60-day notice, the USPTO has updated the postage rate associated with this information collection from $12.10 to $12.25. This results in an increase of $1 in non-hourly cost burden, for a new estimated total annual respondent non-hourly cost burden of $25.

On April 23, 2026 (91 FR 21801), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List. This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

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

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions;

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

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

A 60-day Notice requesting public comment on this information collection was published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2026 at 91 FR 14001. The comment period ended May 26, 2026. No public comments were received.

Title of Collection: Generic Clearance for Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

OMB Control Number: 3045-0137.

Type of Review: Renewal.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 10,000.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,667.

Abstract: The proposed information collection activity provides a means to obtain qualitative feedback from customers and stakeholders in an efficient, timely manner to improve service delivery. By qualitative feedback, we mean information that provides useful perceptions and opinions (but not statistical surveys yielding quantitative results that could be generalized to the population of study). This feedback provides insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences, and expectations; provides an early warning of issues with service; or focuses attention on areas where communication, training, or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. The collection allows for ongoing, collaborative, and actionable communication between AmeriCorps and its customers and stakeholders and contributes directly to the improvement of program management. AmeriCorps will solicit feedback on target areas such as timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. We use the responses to inform our efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders about the Agency's services will be unavailable. AmeriCorps will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:

• The collection is voluntary;

• The collection is low-burden for respondents (based on consideration of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and is low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;

• The collection is noncontroversial and does not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• The collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;

• Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;

• The information gathered will be used only internally, for general service improvement and program management purposes, and is not intended for release outside of AmeriCorps;

• The information gathered will not be used to substantially inform policy decisions;

• The information gathered will be qualitative, not quantitative; and

• The collection will not be designed to yield statistically reliable results, nor will the results be used as though they are generalizable to the population.

Generic clearances for qualitative collections will not be used to gather data that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Using data for those purposes requires more rigorous designs that address a range of complete factors.

As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information. They will not ask questions of a sensitive nature such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. Generic qualitative information collections will be used in the same manner as current generic qualitative information collections. AmeriCorps also seeks to continue using the currently approved generic information collection until the revised information collection is approved by OMB. The currently approved information collection is due to expire on May 31, 2026.

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

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

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions;

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

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

A 60-day Notice requesting public comment on this information collection was published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2026 at 91 FR 14557. The comment period ended May 26, 2026. No public comments were received.

Title of Collection: AmeriCorps External Reviewer Application Instructions.

OMB Control Number: 3045-0090.

Type of Review: Renewal.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 500.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 375.

Abstract: The External Reviewer Application is used by individuals who wish to serve as external reviewers for AmeriCorps when external reviewers are needed to review grant applications. The information collected will be used by AmeriCorps to select review participants for each grant competition. The information is collected electronically using AmeriCorps' web-based system. AmeriCorps seeks to renew the current information collection and continue using the currently approved information collection until the renewed information collection is approved by OMB. The currently approved information collection is due to expire on May 31, 2026.

OAC has received written requests for disinterment from the closest living descendent of each of the twelve individuals. OAC will disinter and facilitate the transport and reinterment of the remains to private cemeteries chosen by the families and Tribes at government expense. This disinterment will be conducted under the authority of Army Regulation 290-5, in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) savings clauses at 25 U.S. Code § 3009. Additional information related to Native Americans buried at the Carlisle Barracks Post Cemetery can be found at https://armycemeteries.army.mil/Cemeteries/Carlisle-Barracks-Main-Post-Cemetery.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Joint Civilian Orientation Conference Program (JCOC) Eligibility of Nominators and Candidates; JCOC Nomination Form, JCOC Registration Form; OMB Control Number 0704-0562.

Type of Request: Extension.

Number of Respondents: 180.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 180.

Average Burden per Response: 11 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 33.

Needs and Uses: Respondents are individuals authorized to nominate candidates for participation in JCOC, and candidates nominated for and selected to participate in JCOC. The JCOC Nomination Form and Registration Form each record the nominator's credentials and contact information and the candidate's credentials and contact information. The completed forms are used to administer the JCOC program, verify the eligibility of nominators and candidates, and to select those nominated individuals for participation in JCOC, which is impossible to do without this information. Ensuring the credentials of nominators and candidates is vital to the integrity and accountability of the JCOC program.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Reginald Lucas.

The purpose of the Transitioning Gang- Involved Youth to Higher Education Program (TGIY) (84.116Y) is to provide a funding opportunity for organizations that work directly with gang-involved youth to help such youth pursue higher education opportunities that will lead to certification or credentials.

The Fiscal Year 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Projects for Organizations to Work Directly with Gang-Involved Youth to Help Such Youth Pursue Higher Education Opportunities, Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness, and Returning Education to the States.

Maximum Award: $1,700,000 for a project period of 48 months.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75).

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/transitioning-gang-involved-youth-higher-education-program, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362505. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) (84.031A) provides grants to eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) to help them become self-sufficient and expand their capacity to serve low-income students by providing funds to improve and strengthen the institution's academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal stability. The FY 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Strengthening Institutional Capacity, Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness, Developing High-Quality, Short-Term Programs That Meet Workforce Pell Grant Requirements, Advancing Artificial Intelligence in Education, and Applications From Rural IHEs. The maximum award for a 60-month budget period is $3,000,000 for individual development grants and $5,000,000 for cooperative arrangement development grants.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1057-1059g.

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/title-iii-part-programs-strengthening-institutions, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362513. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The Department, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. The Department is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: RSA-509, Annual Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights Program Performance Report.

OMB Control Number: 1820-0627.

Type of Review: An extension without change of a currently approved ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 57.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 912.

Abstract: The Annual Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) Program Performance Report (Form RSA-509) will be used to analyze and evaluate the PAIR Program administered by eligible systems in states. These systems provide services to eligible individuals with disabilities to protect their legal and human rights. RSA uses the form to meet specific data collection requirements of Section 509 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Act), and its implementing federal regulations at 34 CFR part 381. PAIR programs must report annually using the RSA-509, which is due no later than 120 days after the end of each fiscal year.

The collection of information through Form RSA-509 has enabled RSA to furnish the President and Congress with data on the provision of protection and advocacy services and has helped to establish a sound basis for future funding requests. Data from the form have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of eligible systems within individual states in meeting annual priorities and objectives. These data also have been used to indicate trends in the provision of services from year-to-year.

Respondents are not-for-profit organizations.

The purpose of the Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs (Training Program), Assistance Listing Number 84.103A, is to provide grants to train the staff and leadership personnel employed in, participating in, or preparing for employment in, projects funded under the Federal TRIO Programs, to improve project operation. The FY 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Student Access and Enrollment Pathways; Student Persistence, Progress, and Outcomes; Program Operations, Compliance & Leadership, and Enhancing Support for Career Planning.

• For an applicant under the Student Access and Enrollment Pathways priority, $1,100,000 for each 12 month budget period.

• For an applicant under the Student Persistence, Progress, and Outcomes; or Program Operations, Compliance & Leadership priorities, $550,000 for each 12 month budget period.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 and 20 U.S.C. 1070a-17.

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/federal-trio-programs/training-program-federal-trio-programs-84103a, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362512. The application notice and instructions on Grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The FIPSE—Basic Needs for Postsecondary Students Program (84.116N) is designed to advance systemic and sustainable solutions to student basic needs insecurity through support programs that address the basic needs of students and to report on practices that improve outcomes for students.

The Fiscal Year 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Returning Education to the States, Basic Needs Security, and Connecting Students to Work-based learning.

Maximum Award: $5,000,000 for a project period of 48 months.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75).

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/basic-needs-postsecondary-students-program, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362508. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The CEVSS Program (84.116G) is designed to encourage institutions of higher education (IHEs) to develop model programs to support veteran student success in postsecondary education by coordinating services to address the academic, financial, physical, and social needs of veteran students. The Fiscal Year 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Establishing a Center of Excellence for Veteran Student Success; and Career Pathways and Workforce Readiness. The maximum award is $3,000,000 for a project period of 36 months.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1161t; 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75).

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/centers-of-excellence-veteran-student-success, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362514. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The FIPSE—OTP program (84.116T) supports projects at eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) or State higher education agencies that create new open textbooks and expand the use of open textbooks and course materials in courses that are part of a degree-granting program, particularly those with high enrollments. Applicants are encouraged to develop projects that demonstrate the greatest potential to achieve the highest level of savings for students through sustainable, expanded use of open educational resources in high-enrollment courses or in programs that prepare individuals for in-demand fields.

The Fiscal Year 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Improving Collaboration and Dissemination, Addressing Gaps in the Open Textbook Marketplace and Bringing Solutions to Scale, Promoting Student Success, Advancing Artificial Intelligence in Education, and Returning Education to the States.

Maximum Award: $2,000,000 for a project period of 48 months.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75).

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/open-textbooks-pilot-program, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362511. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

The Department, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. The Department is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: RSA-227, Annual Client Assistance Program Performance Report.

OMB Control Number: 1820-0528.

Type of Review: A revision of a currently approved ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 57.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 912.

Abstract: The Annual Client Assistance Program Performance Report (RSA-227) is used to analyze and evaluate the CAP Program administered by eligible grantees throughout the States. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended by Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), requires each State to have a CAP in effect to receive payments under the Rehabilitation Act. Section 112 of the Rehabilitation Act authorizes CAP grantees to provide information to individuals with disabilities regarding the services and benefits available under the Rehabilitation Act and the rights afforded them under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition, CAP grantees are authorized to provide advocacy and legal representation to individuals seeking or receiving services under the Rehabilitation Act to resolve disputes with programs providing such services, including vocational rehabilitation services. RSA uses the form to meet specific data collection requirements of Section 112 of the Rehabilitation Act and its implementing Federal regulations at 35 CFR part 370. CAP grantees must report annually using the RSA-227, which is due on or before January 29 of each year.

The collection of information through Form RSA-227 has enabled RSA to furnish the President and Congress with data on the provision of client assistance. Data is used to indicate trends in provision of services from year-to-year, as well as evaluate the effectiveness of eligible grantees in meeting annual priorities.

The respondents to the RSA-227 are the client assistance programs in each state/territory. RSA received recommendations on the initial development of the RSA-227, including frequency of reporting from CAP grantees to ensure that the information requested could be provided with minimal burden to the respondents.

The RDI Grants Program (84.116H) is designed to provide four-year Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) with funds to implement transformational investments in research infrastructure, including research productivity, faculty expertise, graduate programs, physical infrastructure, human capital development, and partnerships leading to increases in external funding. The Fiscal Year 2026 competition includes priorities, selection criteria, and requirements. The priorities are: Funding for HBCUs' Research and Development Infrastructure; Funding for TCCUs' Research and Development Infrastructure; and Aligning R&D activities with workforce development. The maximum award is $5,000,000 for a project period of up to 48 months.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75).

To Apply: The complete funding opportunity announcement and all information needed to apply, including all priorities and program requirements, are available on ED's website at https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/grants-higher-education/improvement-of-postsecondary-education/research-and-development-infrastructure-grant-program, on DOL's website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/grants/apply/find-opportunities, and on Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362516. The application notice and instructions on grants.gov is the official document governing the grant competition.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format.

Note: Henry Maklakiewicz signs this notice in furtherance of DOL's role in providing support to ED.

Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the scientific and technical basis for agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S. Code 10. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the SAB CCL 6 DWC will hold five public meetings to receive a briefing from EPA, review the draft contaminant candidate list, review, discuss, and prepare responses to charge questions, and discuss the draft responses on the EPA's draft CCL 6.

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

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

Oral statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation virtually will be limited to three minutes. Each person making an oral statement should consider providing written comments as well as their oral statement so that the points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Persons interested in providing oral statements should contact the DFO listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; preferably via email, by June 8, 2026, for the June 15, 2026 meeting, by June 22, 2026, for the June 29-July 1, 2026, meetings, and by August 19, 2026, for the August 26, 2026, meeting, to be placed on the list of registered speakers.

Written statements: Written statements will be accepted throughout the advisory process; however, for timely consideration by SAB members, statements should be submitted to the DFO by June 8, 2026, for consideration at the June 15, 2026, meeting, by June 22, 2026, for consideration at the June 29-July 1, 2026 meetings, and by August 19, 2026, for consideration at the August 26, 2026, meeting. Written statements should be supplied by email to the DFO listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the SAB Branch does not publish documents with signatures on its websites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the SAB website. Copyrighted material will not be posted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.

Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact the DFO listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section; at least ten business days before the meetings, to give the EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

Meeting cancellation: The July 1, 2026, meeting may be canceled if the CCL 6 DWC concludes its business on June 30, 2026. If the July 1, 2026, meeting is canceled, notice will be posted on the SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov.

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

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

OMB Control Number: 3060-0236.

Title: § 74.703 Interference.

Form Number: Not applicable.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities, State, local or Tribal Governments and Not for-profit institutions.

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

Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in § 154(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 100 hours.

Total Annual Cost: 100,000.

Needs and Uses: The Commission adopted on April 17, 2023, the Report and Order (R&O), In the Matter of Amendment of Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules for Digital Low Power Television and Television Translator Stations, Update of Parts 74 of the Commission's Rules Related to Low Power Television and Television Translator Stations, MB Docket Nos. 03-185 and 22-261, FCC 23-25. The Report and Order adopted the following revision to 47 CFR 74.703(h): 47 CFR 74.703(h) requires in each instance where suspension of operation is required, the licensee shall submit a full report to the FCC via a Resumption of Operations notice in the Commission's Licensing and Management System (LMS) after operation is resumed, containing details of the nature of the interference, the source of the interfering signals, and the remedial steps taken to eliminate the interference.

The Commission is revising OMB control number 3060-0236. The Commission adopted on October 25, 2021, the Order (Order), In the Matter of Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auction, GN Docket No. 12-268. The Order adopted a number of changes, including removing 47 CFR 74.703(f) and 74.703(g).

This means that collection 3060-0236 now only covers the information collection requirements covered under 47 CFR 74.703(h).

OMB Control No.: 3060-0865.

Title: Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Universal Licensing System Recordkeeping and Third Party Disclosure Requirements.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, Individuals or households, Not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 57,070 respondents; 57,070 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .166 hours (10 minutes)-4 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping and third-party disclosure requirements; on occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and 309(j).

Total Annual Burden: 77,811 hours.

Annual Cost Burden: No cost.

Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as an extension after this 60-day comment period to obtain the full three-year clearance from them.

The purpose of this information collection is to continually streamline and simplify processes for wireless applicants and licensees, who previously used a myriad of forms for various wireless services and types of requests, in order to provide the Commission information that has been collected in separate databases, each for a different group of services. Such processes have resulted in unreliable reporting, duplicate filings for the same licensees/applicants, and higher cost burdens to licensees/applicants. By streamlining the Universal Licensing System (ULS), the Commission eliminates the filing of duplicative applications for wireless carriers; increases the accuracy and reliability of licensing information; and enables all wireless applicants and licensees to file all licensing-related applications and other filings electronically, thus increasing the speed and efficiency of the application process. The ULS also benefits wireless applicants/licensees by reducing the cost of preparing applications, and speeds up the licensing process in that the Commission can introduce new entrants more quickly into this already competitive industry. Finally, ULS enhances the availability of licensing information to the public, which has access to all publicly available wireless licensing information on-line, including maps depicting a licensee's geographic service area.

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

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0888.

Title: Section 1.221, Notice of hearing; appearances; § 1.229 Motions to enlarge, change, or delete issues; § 1.248 Prehearing conferences; hearing conferences; § 76.7, Petition Procedures; § 76.9, Confidentiality of Proprietary Information; § 76.61, Dispute Concerning Carriage; § 76.914, Revocation of Certification; § 76.1001, Unfair Practices; § 76.1003, Program Access Proceedings; § 76.1302, Carriage Agreement Proceedings; § 76.1513, Open Video Dispute Resolution.

Form Number: Not applicable.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 684 respondents; 684 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 6.4 to 95.4 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in sections 4(i), 4(j) 303(r), 338, 340, 614, 615, 616, 623, 628, and 653 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 34,816 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $3,775,680.

Needs and Uses: Commission rules specify pleading and other procedural requirements for parties filing petitions or complaints under Part 76 of the Commission's rules, including petitions for special relief, cable carriage complaints, program access complaints, and program carriage complaints.

This information collection is being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget as a revision based on the following: In Time Warner Cable Inc. v. FCC, 729 F.3d 137 (2013) ( Time Warner Cable ), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the temporary standstill rule for program carriage complaint proceedings set forth in 47 CFR 76.1302(k). Subsequently, the Commission issued an order deleting § 76.1302(k) from its rules to effectuate the Second Circuit's action in Time Warner Cable. Section 76.1302(k) was removed from the CFR effective August 26, 2025 (90 FR 41518).

The other information collections covered under this collection are as follows:

47 CFR 1.221(f) requires that, in a program carriage complaint proceeding filed pursuant to § 76.1302 that the Chief, Media Bureau refers to an administrative law judge for an initial decision, each party, in person or by attorney, shall file a written appearance within five calendar days after the party informs the Chief Administrative Law Judge that it elects not to pursue alternative dispute resolution pursuant to § 76.7(g)(2) or, if the parties have mutually elected to pursue alternative dispute resolution pursuant to § 76.7(g)(2), within five calendar days after the parties inform the Chief Administrative Law Judge that they have failed to resolve their dispute through alternative dispute resolution. The written appearance shall state that the party will appear on the date fixed for hearing and present evidence on the issues specified in the hearing designation order.

47 CFR 1.229(b)(1) requires that, in a program carriage complaint proceeding filed pursuant to § 76.1302 that the Chief, Media Bureau refers to an administrative law judge for an initial decision, a motion to enlarge, change, or delete issues shall be filed within 15 calendar days after the deadline for submitting written appearances pursuant to § 1.221(h), except that persons not named as parties to the proceeding in the designation order may file such motions with their petitions to intervene up to 30 days after publication of the full text or a summary of the designation order in the Federal Register .

47 CFR 1.229(b)(2) provides that any person desiring to file a motion to modify the issues after the expiration of periods specified in paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of § 1.229, shall set forth the reason why it was not possible to file the motion within the prescribed period.

47 CFR 1.248(a) provides that presiding officer may direct the parties or their attorneys to appear at a specified time and place for a status conference during the course of a hearing proceeding, or to submit suggestions in writing, for the purpose of considering, among other things, the matters specified in § 1.248(c). Any party may request a status conference at any time after release of the order designating a matter for hearing. During a status conference, the presiding officer may issue rulings regarding matters relevant to the conduct of the hearing proceeding including procedural matters, discovery, and the submission of briefs or evidentiary materials.

47 CFR 1.248(b) provides that the presiding officer shall schedule an initial status conference promptly after written appearances have been submitted under § 1.91 or § 1.221. At or promptly after the initial status conference, the presiding officer shall adopt a schedule to govern the hearing proceeding. If the Commission designated a matter for hearing on a written record under §§ 1.370 through 1.376, the scheduling order shall include a deadline for filing a motion to request an oral hearing in accordance with § 1.376. If the Commission did not designate the matter for hearing on a written record, the scheduling order shall include a deadline for filing a motion to conduct the hearing on a written record.

47 CFR 76.7. Pleadings seeking to initiate FCC action must adhere to the requirements of § 76.6 (general pleading requirements) and § 76.7 (initiating pleading requirements). Section 76.7 is used for numerous types of petitions and special relief petitions, including general petitions seeking special relief, waivers, enforcement, show cause, forfeiture and declaratory ruling procedures.

47 CFR 76.7(g)(2) provides that, in a proceeding initiated pursuant to § 76.7 that is referred to an administrative law judge, the parties may elect to resolve the dispute through alternative dispute resolution procedures, or may proceed with an adjudicatory hearing, provided that the election shall be submitted in writing to the Commission and the Chief Administrative Law Judge.

47 CFR 76.9. A party that wishes to have confidentiality for proprietary information with respect to a submission it is making to the FCC must file a petition pursuant to the pleading requirements in § 76.7 and use the method described in §§ 0.459 and 76.9 to demonstrate that confidentiality is warranted. The petitions filed pursuant to this provision are contained in the existing information collection requirement and are not changed by the rule changes.

47 CFR 76.61(a) permits a local commercial television station or qualified low power television station that is denied carriage or channel positioning or repositioning in accordance with the must-carry rules by a cable operator to file a complaint with the FCC in accordance with the procedures set forth in § 76.7. Section 76.61(b) permits a qualified local noncommercial educational television station that believes a cable operator has failed to comply with the FCC's signal carriage or channel positioning requirements (§§ 76.56 through 76.57) to file a complaint with the FCC in accordance with the procedures set forth in § 76.7.

47 CFR 76.61(a)(1) states that whenever a local commercial television station or a qualified low power television station believes that a cable operator has failed to meet its carriage or channel positioning obligations, pursuant to §§ 76.56 and 76.57, such station shall notify the operator, in writing, of the alleged failure and identify its reasons for believing that the cable operator is obligated to carry the signal of such station or position such signal on a particular channel.

47 CFR 76.61(a)(2) states that the cable operator shall, within 30 days of receipt of such written notification, respond in writing to such notification and either commence to carry the signal of such station in accordance with the terms requested or state its reasons for believing that it is not obligated to carry such signal or is in compliance with the channel positioning and repositioning and other requirements of the must-carry rules. If a refusal for carriage is based on the station's distance from the cable system's principal headend, the operator's response shall include the location of such headend. If a cable operator denies carriage on the basis of the failure of the station to deliver a good quality signal at the cable system's principal headend, the cable operator must provide a list of equipment used to make the measurements, the point of measurement and a list and detailed description of the reception and over-the-air signal processing equipment used, including sketches such as block diagrams and a description of the methodology used for processing the signal at issue, in its response.

47 CFR 76.914(c) permits a cable operator seeking revocation of a franchising authority's certification to file a petition with the FCC in accordance with the procedures set forth in § 76.7.

47 CFR 76.1003(a) permits any multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitute a violation of the FCC's program access rules to commence an adjudicatory proceeding at the FCC to obtain enforcement of the rules through the filing of a complaint, which must be filed and responded to in accordance with the procedures specified in § 76.7, except to the extent such procedures are modified by § 76.1003.

47 CFR 76.1001(b)(2) permits any multichannel video programming distributor to commence an adjudicatory proceeding by filing a complaint with the Commission alleging that a cable operator, a satellite cable programming vendor in which a cable operator has an attributable interest, or a satellite broadcast programming vendor, has engaged in an unfair act involving terrestrially delivered, cable-affiliated programming, which must be filed and responded to in accordance with the procedures specified in § 76.7, except to the extent such procedures are modified by §§ 76.1001(b)(2) and 76.1003. In program access cases involving terrestrially delivered, cable-affiliated programming, the defendant has 45 days from the date of service of the complaint to file an answer, unless otherwise directed by the Commission. A complainant shall have the burden of proof that the defendant's alleged conduct has the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing the complainant from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to subscribers or consumers; an answer to such a complaint shall set forth the defendant's reasons to support a finding that the complainant has not carried this burden. In addition, a complainant alleging that a terrestrial cable programming vendor has engaged in discrimination shall have the burden of proof that the terrestrial cable programming vendor is wholly owned by, controlled by, or under common control with a cable operator or cable operators, satellite cable programming vendor or vendors in which a cable operator has an attributable interest, or satellite broadcast programming vendor or vendors; an answer to such a complaint shall set forth the defendant's reasons to support a finding that the complainant has not carried this burden.

47 CFR 76.1003(b) requires any aggrieved MVPD intending to file a complaint under this section to first notify the potential defendant cable operator, and/or the potential defendant satellite cable programming vendor or satellite broadcast programming vendor, that it intends to file a complaint with the Commission based on actions alleged to violate one or more of the provisions contained in §§ 76.1001 or 76.1002 of this part. The notice must be sufficiently detailed so that its recipient(s) can determine the nature of the potential complaint. The potential complainant must allow a minimum of ten (10) days for the potential defendant(s) to respond before filing a complaint with the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1003(c) describes the required contents of a program access complaint, in addition to the requirements of § 76.7 of this part.

47 CFR 76.1003(c)(3) requires a program access complaint to contain evidence that the complainant competes with the defendant cable operator, or with a multichannel video programming distributor that is a customer of the defendant satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming vendor or a terrestrial cable programming vendor alleged to have engaged in conduct described in § 76.1001(b)(1).

47 CFR 76.1003(d) states that, in a case where recovery of damages is sought, the complaint shall contain a clear and unequivocal request for damages and appropriate allegations in support of such claim.

47 CFR 76.1003(e)(1) requires cable operators, satellite cable programming vendors, or satellite broadcast programming vendors which expressly reference and rely upon a document in asserting a defense to a program access complaint or in responding to a material allegation in a program access complaint filed pursuant to § 76.1003, to include such document or documents, such as contracts for carriage of programming referenced and relied on, as part of the answer. Except as otherwise provided or directed by the Commission, any cable operator, satellite cable programming vendor or satellite broadcast programming vendor upon which a program access complaint is served under this section shall answer within twenty (20) days of service of the complaint, provided that the answer shall be filed within forty-five (45) days of service of the complaint if the complaint alleges a violation of section 628(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, or § 76.1001(a).

47 CFR 76.1003(e)(2) requires an answer to an exclusivity complaint to provide the defendant's reasons for refusing to sell the subject programming to the complainant. In addition, the defendant may submit its programming contracts covering the area specified in the complaint with its answer to refute allegations concerning the existence of an impermissible exclusive contract. If there are no contracts governing the specified area, the defendant shall so certify in its answer. Any contracts submitted pursuant to this provision may be protected as proprietary pursuant to § 76.9 of this part.

47 CFR 76.1003(e)(3) requires an answer to a discrimination complaint to state the reasons for any differential in prices, terms, or conditions between the complainant and its competitor, and to specify the particular justification set forth in § 76.1002(b) of this part relied upon in support of the differential.

47 CFR 76.1003(e)(4) requires an answer to a complaint alleging an unreasonable refusal to sell programming to state the defendant's reasons for refusing to sell to the complainant, or for refusing to sell to the complainant on the same terms and conditions as complainant's competitor, and to specify why the defendant's actions are not discriminatory.

47 CFR 76.1003(f) provides that, within fifteen (15) days after service of an answer, unless otherwise directed by the Commission, the complainant may file and serve a reply which shall be responsive to matters contained in the answer and shall not contain new matters.

47 CFR 76.1003(g) states that any complaint filed pursuant to this subsection must be filed within one year of the date on which one of three specified events occurs.

47 CFR 76.1003(h) sets forth the remedies that are available for violations of the program access rules, which include the imposition of damages, and/or the establishment of prices, terms, and conditions for the sale of programming to the aggrieved multichannel video programming distributor, as well as sanctions available under title V or any other provision of the Communications Act.

47 CFR 76.1003(j) states in addition to the general pleading and discovery rules contained in § 76.7 of this part, parties to a program access complaint may serve requests for discovery directly on opposing parties, and file a copy of the request with the Commission. The respondent shall have the opportunity to object to any request for documents that are not in its control or relevant to the dispute. Such request shall be heard, and determination made, by the Commission. Until the objection is ruled upon, the obligation to produce the disputed material is suspended. Any party who fails to timely provide discovery requested by the opposing party to which it has not raised an objection as described above, or who fails to respond to a Commission order for discovery material, may be deemed in default and an order may be entered in accordance with the allegations contained in the complaint, or the complaint may be dismissed with prejudice.

47 CFR 76.1003(l) permits a program access complainant seeking renewal of an existing programming contract to file a petition along with its complaint requesting a temporary standstill of the price, terms, and other conditions of the existing programming contract pending resolution of the complaint, to which the defendant will have the opportunity to respond within 10 days of service of the petition, unless otherwise directed by the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1302(a) states that any video programming vendor or multichannel video programming distributor aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitute a violation of the program carriage rules may commence an adjudicatory proceeding at the Commission to obtain enforcement of the rules through the filing of a complaint. The complaint shall be filed and responded to in accordance with the procedures specified in § 76.7, except to the extent such procedures are modified by § 76.1302.

47 CFR 76.1302(b) states that any aggrieved video programming vendor or multichannel video programming distributor intending to file a program carriage complaint must first notify the potential defendant multichannel video programming distributor that it intends to file a complaint with the Commission based on actions alleged to violate one or more of the provisions contained in § 76.1301 of this part. The notice must be sufficiently detailed so that its recipient(s) can determine the specific nature of the potential complaint. The potential complainant must allow a minimum of ten (10) days for the potential defendant(s) to respond before filing a complaint with the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1302(c) specifies the content of carriage agreement complaints, in addition to the requirements of § 76.7 of this part.

47 CFR 76.1302(c)(1) provides that a program carriage complaint filed pursuant to § 76.1302 must contain the following: whether the complainant is a multichannel video programming distributor or video programming vendor, and, in the case of a multichannel video programming distributor, identify the type of multichannel video programming distributor, the address and telephone number of the complainant, what type of multichannel video programming distributor the defendant is, and the address and telephone number of each defendant.

47 CFR 76.1302(d) sets forth the evidence that a program carriage complaint filed pursuant to § 76.1302 must contain in order to establish a prima facie case of a violation of § 76.1301.

47 CFR 76.1302(e)(1) provides that a multichannel video programming distributor upon whom a program carriage complaint filed pursuant to § 76.1302 is served shall answer within sixty (60) days of service of the complaint, unless otherwise directed by the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1302(e)(2) states that an answer to a program carriage complaint shall address the relief requested in the complaint, including legal and documentary support, for such response, and may include an alternative relief proposal without any prejudice to any denials or defenses raised.

47 CFR 76.1302(f) states that within twenty (20) days after service of an answer, unless otherwise directed by the Commission, the complainant may file and serve a reply which shall be responsive to matters contained in the answer and shall not contain new matters.

47 CFR 76.1302(h) states that any complaint filed pursuant to this subsection must be filed within one year of the date on which one of three events occurs.

47 CFR 76.1302(j)(1) states that upon completion of such adjudicatory proceeding, the Commission shall order appropriate remedies, including, if necessary, mandatory carriage of a video programming vendor's programming on defendant's video distribution system, or the establishment of prices, terms, and conditions for the carriage of a video programming vendor's programming.

47 CFR 76.1513(a) permits any party aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitute a violation of the FCC's regulations governing open video systems or in section 653 of the Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 573) to commence an adjudicatory proceeding at the Commission to obtain enforcement of the rules through the filing of a complaint, which must be filed and responded to in accordance with the procedures specified in § 76.7, except to the extent such procedures are modified by § 76.1513.

47 CFR 76.1513(b) provides that an open video system operator may not provide in its carriage contracts with programming providers that any dispute must be submitted to arbitration, mediation, or any other alternative method for dispute resolution prior to submission of a complaint to the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1513(c) requires that any aggrieved party intending to file a complaint under this section must first notify the potential defendant open video system operator that it intends to file a complaint with the Commission based on actions alleged to violate one or more of the provisions contained in this part or in section 653 of the Communications Act. The notice must be in writing and must be sufficiently detailed so that its recipient(s) can determine the specific nature of the potential complaint. The potential complainant must allow a minimum of ten (10) days for the potential defendant(s) to respond before filing a complaint with the Commission.

47 CFR 76.1513(d) describes the contents of an open video system complaint.

47 CFR 76.1513(e) states that an open video system operator upon which a complaint is served under this section shall answer within thirty (30) days of service of the complaint and specifies the requirements for such answers.

47 CFR 76.1513(f) states within twenty (20) days after service of an answer, the complainant may file and serve a reply which shall be responsive to matters contained in the answer and shall not contain new matters.

47 CFR 76.1513(g) requires that any complaint filed pursuant to this subsection must be filed within one year of the date on which one of three events occurs.

47 CFR 76.1513(h) states that upon completion of the adjudicatory proceeding, the Commission shall order appropriate remedies, including, if necessary, requiring carriage, awarding damages to any person denied carriage, or any combination of such sanctions. Such order shall set forth a timetable for compliance, and shall become effective upon release.

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

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before June 29, 2026. Write “MindSift; File No. 242 3030” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your State—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.

We encourage you to submit comments through the https://www.regulations.gov website. Postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay because of heightened security screening. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “MindSift; File No. 242 3030” on your comment and on the envelope, and send it via overnight service to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Stop H-144 (Annex M), Washington, DC 20580.

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

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

Visit the FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to read this document and the news release describing the proposed settlement. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments it receives on or before June 29, 2026. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

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

Respondent is a New Hampshire limited liability company with its principal place of business in Nashua, New Hampshire. It provides marketing and data brokering services.

MindSift, in conjunction with CMG Media Corporation d/b/a Cox Media Group (“CMG”) and 1010 Digital Works LLC (“1010 Digital”), developed and operated a marketing service that purported to allow CMG's customers to target ads to consumers within particular geographic service areas based on conversations consumers had near their smart devices.

The Commission's proposed two-count complaint alleges that Respondent (I) misrepresented that its marketing service collected and used voice data, obtained consent from consumers for such collection and use, and offered precise geotargeting, and (II) provided the means and instrumentalities for CMG to deceive its customers into purchasing the marketing service.

Regarding Count I, the proposed complaint alleges MindSift represented that its marketing service collected and used voice data from smart devices for marketing purposes, obtained consent for the collection and use of voice data from consumers, and created lists of consumers in particular geographic areas. The proposed complaint alleges that these claims are false or misleading, in violation of section 5 of the FTC Act, because the marketing service did not collect or use voice data, did not obtain consent from consumers for the collection and use of their voice data, and did not create lists of consumers in particular geographic areas.

Regarding Count II, the proposed complaint alleges that by furnishing deceptive representations in marketing materials, sales pitches, and responses to questions from CMG's customers, MindSift provided the means and instrumentalities for CMG to deceive customers. Based on the foregoing, the complaint alleges that Respondent engaged in deceptive acts or practices in violation of section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

The Proposed Order contains injunctive relief designed to prevent Respondent MindSift from engaging in the same or similar acts or practices in the future. Provision I prohibits MindSift from making any misrepresentation about: (1) the qualities or features of its advertising or marketing services; (2) the collection and use of Voice Data; (3) consumers' consent to the collection, use, or disclosure of Voice Data; or (4) the geographic targeting capabilities of its advertising or marketing services. (Voice Data is defined in the Proposed Order.)

Provision II requires MindSift to pay to the Commission $25,000 in monetary relief. Provision III describes the procedures and legal rights related to that payment. Provision IV requires MindSift to provide customer information to enable the Commission to efficiently administer redress to those affected by the deception. Provision V requires MindSift to obtain and submit acknowledgments of receipt of the Order.

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

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

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

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before June 29, 2026. Write “1010 Digital; File No. 242 3033” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your State—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.

We encourage you to submit comments through the https://www.regulations.gov website. Postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay because of heightened security screening. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “1010 Digital; File No. 242 3033” on your comment and on the envelope, and send it via overnight service to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Stop H-144 (Annex N), Washington, DC 20580.

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

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

Visit the FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to read this document and the news release describing the proposed settlement. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments it receives on or before June 29, 2026. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from 1010 Digital Works LLC (“1010 Digital” or “Respondent”). The proposed consent order (“Proposed Order”) has been placed on the public record for 30 days for receipt of public comments from interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will again review the agreement, along with the comments received, and will decide whether it should make final the Proposed Order or withdraw from the agreement and take appropriate action.

Respondent is a Wisconsin limited liability company with its principal place of business in Mequon, Wisconsin. 1010 Digital provides marketing and data brokering services. 1010 Digital, in conjunction with CMG Media Corporation d/b/a Cox Media Group (“CMG”) and MindSift LLC (“MindSift”), developed and operated a marketing service that purported to allow CMG's customers to target ads to consumers within particular geographic service areas based on conversations consumers had near their smart devices.

The Commission's proposed two-count complaint alleges that Respondent (I) misrepresented that its marketing service collected and used voice data, obtained consent from consumers for such collection and use, and offered precise geotargeting, and (II) provided the means and instrumentalities for CMG to deceive its customers into purchasing the marketing service.

Regarding Count I, the proposed complaint alleges 1010 Digital represented that its marketing service collected and used voice data from smart devices for marketing purposes, obtained consent for the collection and use of voice data from consumers, and created lists of consumers in particular geographic areas. The proposed complaint alleges that these claims are false or misleading, in violation of section 5 of the FTC Act, because the marketing service did not collect or use voice data, did not obtain consent from consumers for the collection and use of their voice data, and did not create lists of consumers in particular geographic areas.

Regarding Count II, the proposed complaint alleges that by furnishing deceptive representations in marketing materials, sales pitches, and responses to questions from CMG's customers, 1010 Digital provided the means and instrumentalities for CMG to deceive customers. Based on the foregoing, the complaint alleges that Respondent engaged in deceptive acts or practices in violation of section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

The Proposed Order contains injunctive relief designed to prevent Respondent 1010 Digital from engaging in the same or similar acts or practices in the future. Provision I prohibits 1010 Digital from making any misrepresentation about: (1) the qualities or features of its advertising or marketing services; (2) the collection and use of Voice Data; consumers' consent to the collection, use, or disclosure of Voice Data; or the geographic targeting capabilities of its advertising or marketing services. (Voice Data is defined in the Proposed Order.)

Provision II requires Respondent to pay to the Commission $25,000 in monetary relief. Provision III describes the procedures and legal rights related to that payment. Provision IV requires 1010 Digital to provide customer information to enable the Commission to efficiently administer redress to those affected by the deception. Provision V requires Respondent to obtain and submit acknowledgments of receipt of the Order.

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

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

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

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before June 29, 2026. Write “CMG Media; File No. 242 3029” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your State—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.

We encourage you to submit comments through the https://www.regulations.gov website. Postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay because of heightened security screening. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “CMG Media; File No. 242 3029” on your comment and on the envelope, and send it via overnight service to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Stop H-144 (Annex L), Washington, DC 20580.

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

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

Visit the FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to read this document and the news release describing the proposed settlement. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments it receives on or before June 29, 2026. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from CMG Media Corporation d/b/a Cox Media Group (“CMG” or “Respondent”).

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

Respondent CMG is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. CMG owns local television and radio stations across the country and sells marketing and advertising services to small- and medium-sized businesses in its television and radio markets.

CMG, in conjunction with MindSift LLC, offered a marketing service that purported to allow CMG's customers to target ads to consumers within particular geographic service areas based on conversations consumers had near their smart devices.

The Commission's proposed one-count complaint alleges Respondent represented that its marketing service collected and used voice data from smart devices for marketing purposes, obtained consent for the collection and use of voice data from consumers, and created lists of consumers in particular geographic areas. The proposed complaint alleges that these claims are false or misleading, in violation of section 5 of the FTC Act, because the marketing service did not collect or use voice data, did not obtain consent from consumers for the collection and use of their voice data, and did not create lists of consumers in particular geographic areas.

The Proposed Order contains injunctive relief designed to prevent CMG from engaging in the same or similar acts or practices in the future. Provision I prohibits CMG from making any misrepresentation about: (1) the qualities or features of its advertising or marketing services; (2) the collection and use of Voice Data; consumers' consent to the collection, use, or disclosure of Voice Data; or the geographic targeting capabilities of its advertising or marketing services. (Voice Data is defined in the Proposed Order.)

Provision II requires Respondent to pay to the Commission $880,000 in monetary relief. Provision III describes the procedures and legal rights related to that payment. Provision IV requires CMG to provide customer information to enable the Commission to efficiently administer redress to those affected by the deception. Provision V requires Respondent to obtain and submit acknowledgments of receipt of the Order.

Provisions VI-VIII are reporting and compliance provisions, which include recordkeeping requirements and provisions requiring CMG to provide information or documents necessary for the Commission to monitor compliance. Provision IX states that the Proposed Order will remain in effect for 20 years, with certain exceptions.

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

The FDA final rule, “Requirements for Additional Traceability Records for Certain Foods” (87 FR 70910, November 21, 2022) (Food Traceability Rule), establishes enhanced recordkeeping requirements for those who manufacture, process, pack, or hold foods on FDA's Food Traceability List. The Food Traceability Rule requires lot-level tracking for foods on the Food Traceability List. Businesses that perform specific activities are required to assign unique codes, known as Traceability Lot Codes, that must be passed along unchanged (unless the food is transformed) as the food moves through the supply chain. Entities that handle foods on the Food Traceability List are required to record Key Data Elements (KDEs), such as the Traceability Lot Code, when they perform specific Critical Tracking Events (CTEs) like initial packing, transformation, and shipping. Lot-level tracking enables rapid tracing of contaminated foods during recall events, allowing FDA to find the source of the food faster, narrowing the scope of recalls, and removing affected product from the supply chain quickly, resulting in fewer foodborne illnesses and deaths.

The original compliance date for all persons subject to the recordkeeping requirements of the Food Traceability Rule was January 20, 2026. FDA proposed to extend the compliance date for the rule by 30 months to July 20, 2028 (90 FR 38084, August 7, 2025). Subsequently, the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act of 2026 (Pub. L. 119-37) (Continuing Appropriations Act) directed FDA not to enforce the Food Traceability Rule prior to that same date of July 20, 2028. FDA intends to comply with this Congressional directive.

Section 780 of the Continuing Appropriations Act also directed FDA to engage quarterly with regulated entities to identify and implement, as appropriate, additional flexibilities for satisfying the Food Traceability Rule's lot-level tracking requirement. This public meeting is part of a series of engagements being held to fulfill that directive. Congress further stated that within 180 days of the Continuing Appropriations Act's enactment, FDA should provide industry stakeholders with recommendations for these additional flexibilities. At present, with most of the quarterly engagements still ahead of us, we have not made a decision about the scope of flexibilities that would best address the challenges being faced by regulated entities while still protecting public health and maintaining the benefits of the Food Traceability Rule. However, we recognize Congress's desire for FDA to be transparent with stakeholders about this process, and specifically about where things stand approximately 180 days after enactment of the Continuing Appropriations Act. One goal of the discussion paper, “Identifying Additional Flexibilities for Satisfying the Food Traceability Rule's Lot-Level Tracking Requirement,” is to provide that transparency.

The goal of this public meeting is for FDA to hear stakeholder feedback on lot-level food traceability efforts and implementation challenges facing industry. FDA is interested in hearing about the challenges and potential solutions for satisfying the Food Traceability Rule's lot-level tracking requirements.

We are also making available a discussion paper, “Identifying Additional Flexibilities for Satisfying the Food Traceability Rule's Lot-Level Tracking Requirement,” that includes potential flexibilities and questions we have around those flexibilities (Ref. 1). We intend for this discussion paper to further dialogue with regulated entities and other stakeholders, including at this public meeting, and help advance progress toward successful implementation of the Food Traceability Rule. We encourage those participating in this public meeting to consider the questions in this discussion paper as you develop your remarks for this meeting.

We want to provide all stakeholders with an opportunity to actively engage with FDA on this topic. We therefore invite and encourage all interested parties to submit feedback on the discussion paper to https://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0053. Comments do not need to cover every question that is asked in the document; you are encouraged to focus on whichever aspects of the discussion paper are of the most interest to you. To ensure that we can fully consider your feedback as we work to expeditiously identify flexibilities to implement, please submit your comments no later than July 15, 2026.

Please note that the discussion paper does not reflect an exhaustive list of options that FDA plans to consider. New ideas may emerge as a result of this public meeting and our other upcoming engagements with stakeholders. The document is meant to capture the areas where we currently have the most questions, or where we think further dialogue would be especially helpful. Please also note that the order in which the topics are listed is not meant to represent a prioritization or a preference for any topic.

Registration: Please visit the following website for additional information and to register for the public meeting: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/fda-public-meeting-challenges-and-solutions-lot-level-food-traceability-06152026?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery.

The virtual public meeting is free and open to the public, but registration is necessary to attend. General registration will remain open until June 14, 2026. Individuals who want to speak during the public comment period must register by June 5, 2026. Same-day registration is not allowed. Individuals that have already registered through the Partnership for Food Traceability website do not need to register again. Instructions for joining the virtual meeting will be provided upon registration.

Requests for Oral Presentations: During online registration you may indicate if you wish to present during the public comment session. We will do our best to accommodate all requests to make public comments. Following the close of registration, we will determine the amount of time allotted to each presenter and will notify participants in advance. All requests to make oral presentations must be received by the close of registration on June 5, 2026. All presentations must be given orally; slides or visuals will not be able to be accommodated on the virtual platform. No commercial or promotional material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting.

Notice of this meeting is given pursuant to 21 CFR 10.65.

In the Federal Register of April 29, 2026, FDA published a notice with a 30-day comment period to request comments on the document entitled “AI-Enabled Optimization of Early-Phase Clinical Trials Pilot Program; Request for Information.” FDA issued this request for information to solicit input on a proposed pilot program to assess how AI-enabled technologies can improve efficiency, speed, and quality of decision-making in early phase clinical trials.

The Agency has received a request for a 30-day extension of the comment period for the request for information.

FDA has considered the request and is extending the comment period for the request for information for 30 days, until June 29, 2026. The Agency believes that a 30-day extension allows adequate time for interested persons to submit comments.

The plats of survey of the following described lands are scheduled to be officially filed in the Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office, Portland, Oregon:

A person or party who wishes to protest one or more plats of survey identified above must file a written notice of protest with the State Director for Oregon/Washington, Bureau of Land Management, at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

The notice of protest must identify the specific plat(s) of survey that the person or party wishes to protest. The notice of protest must be received in the BLM Oregon State Office no later than the scheduled date of the proposed official filing of plat(s) of survey being protested, see the DATES section earlier; if received after regular business hours, a notice of protest will be considered filed the next business day. Any notice of protest filed after the scheduled date of official filing will be untimely and will not be considered.

A written statement of reasons in support of the protest, if not filed with the notice of protest, must be filed with the BLM State Director for Oregon/Washington within 30 days after the notice of protest is received.

If a notice of protest against a plat of survey is received prior to the scheduled date of official filing, the official filing of the plat of survey identified in the notice of protest will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat of survey will not be officially filed until the next business day after all timely protests have been dismissed or otherwise resolved.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in a notice of protest, you should be aware that the documents you submit, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available in their entirety at any time. While you can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

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

Human remains representing, at least, four individuals (Ancestors) have been identified. No associated funerary objects have been identified. These Ancestors were transferred from the Department of Physical Anthropology, Museum of the American Indian (MAI) to Dr. Theodore Kazimiroff at NYUCD in 1956.

On an unknown date, one Ancestor was removed by an unknown individual from an unknown site near Bogota, Bergen County, New Jersey. In 1925, the Ancestor was accessioned into the collection the MAI. No donor is listed in the records.

In 1906, one individual was removed by an unknown individual from an unknown site near Greenville, Jersey City, New Jersey. No donor is listed in the records. The remains were not catalogued in the ledger of the DPA, MAI, but were transferred to NYUCD from the DPA, MAI with the other Ancestors in 1956.

On an unknown date, one Ancestor was removed from an unknown site near Branchville, Sussex County, New Jersey. In 1904, the individual was donated to the MAI by collector A.A. Getman. The Ancestor was catalogued into the collection of the MAI in 1917. NYUCD has no knowledge or record of the presence of any potentially hazardous substances used to treat any of the human remains.

On an unknown date, one Ancestor was removed by Edwin C. Waters from an unknown site near Cornwall, Orange County, New York. In 1917 the Ancestor was catalogued in the DPA, collection as “Manhasset.” NYUCD has no knowledge or record of the presence of any potentially hazardous substances used to treat any of the human remains.

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

NYUCD has determined that:

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

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

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, NYUCD 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. NYUCD 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.

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

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. The nine associated funerary objects include ceramic fragments, fired clay fragments, debitage, and flake tools. The individual and associated funerary objects were removed from an unknown location near Eureka Springs in Carroll County, AR by an unknown collector at an unknown date, and donated to the Museum at an unknown date. No known hazardous substances were used to treat the human remains or associated funerary objects.

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

The University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology has determined that:

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

• The nine 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 Osage Nation.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology 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.

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

A total of three cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The three objects of cultural patrimony are stone and obsidian projectile points. There are two stone projectile points and one obsidian projectile point that are considered Native American and are items of cultural patrimony. Provenience and provenance information is limited. Two points were reportedly transferred from a retired faculty member without documentation, and one point was reportedly found on a trail in San Luis Obispo County, California. There are no known potentially hazardous substances used to treat any of the cultural items.

Cal Poly has determined that:

• The three objects of cultural patrimony described in this notice have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group, including any constituent sub-group (such as a band, clan, lineage, ceremonial society, or other subdivision), according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

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

Additional, written requests for repatriation of the cultural items in this notice must be sent to the 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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Cal Poly 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. Cal Poly is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Eastern Washington 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.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual has been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. Human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Mason County, WA. In 1961, human remains representing one individual were removed from near Lilliwaup in Mason County, WA. The remains were removed by Jane Durken near the old Eldon Hotel and donated to the Burke Museum in 1963 (Burke Accn. #1963-36). No known individuals were identified. In 1974, the Burke Museum legally transferred portions of the human remains to Seattle University. Sometime in the early 1990s, these human remains were transferred to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, then subsequently transferred in 1992 to Eastern Washington University for identification. No known individuals were identified.

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

The Eastern Washington University has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Skokomish Indian Tribe.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Eastern Washington University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The Eastern Washington 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.

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

There is a total of 2,463 lots of associated funerary objects (134 of which are currently missing or discarded) from the Bodega Marine Lab (UC Davis Accession 490). The 2,329 lots of present associated funerary objects are 1,201 lots of unmodified shell, 299 lots of faunal bone, 260 lots of chipped stone, 233 lots of organic material, 165 lots of fire affected rock, 70 lots of charcoal, 51 lots of historic material, 19 lots of worked shell and shell beads, 12 lots of unmodified stone, 11 lots of petrified wood, six lots of groundstone, one lot of obsidian hydration slides, and one lot of worked bone. The 134 lots of missing or discarded associated funerary objects are 108 lots of organic material, 19 lots of unmodified shell, three lots of charcoal, two lots of soil samples, one lot of fire affected rock, and one lot of unidentified missing material. Accession 490 resulted from UC Davis archaeology field schools led by graduated student Michael Kennedy between 1997 and 1999. The collection is comprised of three sites, all located within UC Davis's Bodega Marine Reserve in Sonoma County, California. The three sites are CA-SON-322 (Bodega Lagoon Site), CA-SON-327 (Mussel Point) and CA-SON-2378 (Bodega Marine Lab (BML) Site/Ocean Springs).

There is a total of eight lots of associated funerary objects from the Bodega Bay area in the UC Davis Department of Anthropology Teaching Collection (four of which are currently missing). The associated funerary objects are obsidian projectile points. They were surface collected by Michael Kennedy from the Bodega Bay area between 1998 and 2000 and donated to the Teaching Collection in 2002.

There is a total of 12 associated funerary objects from the Bodega Marine Lab and Reserve (BML/BMR) property. The associated funerary objects are six lots of projectile points, one lot of chipped stone and shell, one small grinding bowl, one large grinding bowl, one grinding bowl fragment, one stone, and one lot of unidentified missing material. The projectile points, stone, chipped stone, and shell were found on BMR property and deposited at the BML at various dates. The small grinding bowl may have been found in the 1960s during construction. The large grinding bowl was found in the late 1980s while excavating for building construction. The grinding bowl fragment was found on the property at an unknown date.

There is a total of one associated funerary object from Novato, Marin County, California in the UC Davis Anthropology Teaching Collection. The associated funerary object is a groundstone pestle that was acquired at an unknown time.

The affiliation of the above collections is with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, California. UC Davis is unaware of any treatment of the associated funerary objects with pesticides, preservatives, or other substances. However, UC Davis has not conducted any pesticide testing.

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

UC Davis has determined that:

• The 2,484 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 Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after June 29, 2026.. If competing requests for repatriation are received, UC Davis 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. UC Davis 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.

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

A total of seven cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The seven unassociated funerary items are lithics, cataloged as five charm stones, one arrow point, and one fishing weight. A total of four of the charm stones were removed from Sonoma County prior to 1909 by Charles P. Wilcomb, and acquired by the Oakland Public Museum (OPM) in 1909. OPM and its collection were incorporated into the Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) in 1969. A total of one charm stone was removed from Sonoma County prior to 1912 and was donated to OPM by Edward Paxton in 1912. A total of one arrow point was found by Grant Monroe near Kenwood in Sonoma County at an unknown date and was donated to OPM in 1950 by the collector. A total of one fishing weight was found by Cameron Lyon near the crest of Bear Valley Trail in Point Reyes, Marin County at an unknown date and was donated to OMCA by the collector in 1992. The presence of potentially hazardous substances on these particular items is unknown.

The OMCA has determined that:

• The seven 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 Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, California.

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

Repatriation of the cultural items in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the OMCA 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 OMCA is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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

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

Human remains representing at least 16 individuals have been identified. The 12 associated funerary objects include eight shell beads, two ceramic sherds, one lot debitage, and one lot faunal bone fragments. The human remains and associated funerary objects originated from archaeological site 3PU200, also known as the Nevins Cairn site, in Pulaski County, Missouri. They were excavated by archaeologists on private land in 1981 and were transferred to the MoDNR in 2015.

Human remains representing at least two individuals have been identified. The one associated funerary object is one lot of faunal bone fragments. The human remains and associated funerary object originated from archaeological site 23PU44, also known as Goat Bluff Cave or Bruce Cave, on private property near Jerome, Pulaski County, Missouri. They were unearthed by a private landowner there in the 1950's.

Human remains representing at least four individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains originated from an unspecified archaeological site near where the Gasconade River crosses Interstate-44 in Pulaski County, MO. The remains were donated to the Department of Oral Biology at the University of Illinois in Chicago by a former faculty member several decades ago, and were transferred to the MoDNR in 2012.

Human remains representing at least two individuals have been identified. The 198 associated funerary objects include 166 ceramic sherds, one scallorn point, one serrated point, two reworked scrapers, 10 lithic fragments, one miscellaneous rock, one lot debitage, 13 large faunal fragments, two mussel shells, and one bone awl. The human remains and associated funerary objects originated from archaeological site 23PU40, a southwest facing cave commonly known as Doyle Cave, through private archaeological excavation in 1961. All ancestors and belongings were transferred to the Center for Archaeological Research in Springfield, Missouri in 1998, with transfer of all materials to MoDNR completed in 2026.

Human remains representing at least five individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The human remains originated from an unspecified cave site on private property in Pulaski County, Missouri, and were donated to the MoDNR in 2002 by the wife of a deceased collector.

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

The Missouri Department of Natural Resources has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of at least 29 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 211 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 Osage Nation.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources 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 Missouri Department of Natural Resources 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.

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 Santa Barbara 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.

A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The one sacred object/object of cultural patrimony is a Tsimshian amhalaayt (chiefly headdress). This item was purchased by Major Max Fleischmann, from W.C. Waters' Bear Totem Store in Wrangell, Alaska in 1939, and donated to the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History later that same year. Traditional knowledge of Indian Tribes shared through consultation revealed that this amhalaayt was created and worn by Sm'oogyit Niishluut (Chief Sidney Campbell), a founding leader and Chief of the Metlakatla Indian Community.

The Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History has determined that:

• The one sacred object/object of cultural patrimony described in this notice are, 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 Metlakatla Indian Community, Annette Island Reserve.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 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 Santa Barbara 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.

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 BLM, 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.

These data supplement NICs published previously for other repatriations of ancestral remains and funerary objects for sites in Kachemak Bay, AK (71 FR 19688, April 15, 1993; 65 FR 24503, April 26, 2000; 88 FR 48912, July 28, 2023). Based on the information available, additional human remains representing at least 10 individuals have been reasonably identified at the University of Pennsylvania Museum (UPM), Philadelphia, PA, including five (n=5) from the Yukon Island site (49-SEL-00001) in southern Kachemak Bay (UPM 31-20-11.3, 31-20-108.1, 31-20-443), and five (n=5) from the Cottonwood Creek site (49-SEL-00030) on the north shore of Kachemak Bay (UPM 32-7-144A & -144B, 32-7-715, 32-7-1522.1, 32-7-1705).

There are 21 associated funerary objects (AFOs). A total of six AFOs from SEL-00030 include: an antler artificial burial eye (UPM 31-20-104, associated with (@) previously repatriated remains 31-20-102), a slate blade (31-20-109, @31-20-108), bear faunal remains (31-20-115.1, @previously repatriated 31-20-115), a bone point (31-20-445) and cut faunal remains (31-20-453) and a bone awl (31-20-469), all @previously repatriated 31-20-443.

A total of 14 AFOs from SEL-00001 include: a barbed bone point (31-20-2351, @with previously repatriated 31-20-2346), two bone artificial burial eyes (32-7-1747) and a marble labret (32-7-1748) and a pointed bone splinter (32-7-1753) @previously repatriated 32-7-1744, a bone artificial burial eye (32-7-1749, @previously repatriated 32-7-1743), two bone artificial burial eyes (32-7-1750a-b, @previously repatriated 32-7-1745), a marble labret (32-7-1752, @previously repatriated 32-7-1746), and five AFOs @previously repatriated 32-9-1 (ivory labret, 32-9-2; ear plug 32-9-3; basalt lance blade, 32-9-4; organic dart head, 32-9-5; bird bone bead, 32-9-53).

A total of one AFO is from the Yukon Island Fox Farm site (49-SEL-00041): a greenstone adze blade (31-20-2148), associated with previously repatriated ancestral remains 31-20-2320.

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

The BLM has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 10 individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The 21 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed intentionally with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

• There is a reasonable connection between the human remains and associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Native Village of Nanwalek (aka English Bay); Native Village of Port Graham; and the Seldovia Village Tribe.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the BLM 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 BLM 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.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before May 9, 2026. Pursuant to 36 CFR 60.13, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers.

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

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

A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The one unassociated funerary object is University of Pennsylvania Museum Object #32-7-1052, which is an artificial bone eye. Such eyes were used during prehistoric burial practices in Kachemak Bay, Alaska. This particular UFO was excavated by archaeologist Frederica de Laguna in 1932 during excavations at the Yukon Island site (49-SEL-00001). The UFO was found in the midden of this site and not directly associated with any ancestral human remains or burials.

The BLM has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Native Village of Nanwalek (aka English Bay); Native Village of Port Graham; and the Seldovia Village Tribe.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the BLM 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 BLM is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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

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

Based on the information available, human remains representing at least one individual have been reasonably identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The remains consist of one fragment of the iliac crest of an innominate that was retrieved from the East Cape site (49-KOD-00032) on eastern Spruce Island, Kodiak archipelago, Alaska, in 1964 during a University of Wisconsin-Madison affiliated archaeological survey.

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

The BLM 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 Native Village of Ouzinkie.

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 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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the BLM 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 BLM 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.

The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before May 16, 2026. Pursuant to 36 CFR 60.13, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers

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

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

Authority: 36 CFR 60.13

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

Human remains representing, at least, three individuals have been identified. The four associated funerary objects are: three stone personal adornment items and partial remains of one dog. The Knapp Site, located near Gill, Massachusetts (in Franklin County) was surveyed and excavated by John Blank (d. 2019) starting in the Summer of 1969, as part of a field school conducted by Cleveland State University. Blank periodically worked with colleagues at Kent State University and Case Western Reserve University. Through these connections, material culture and biofacts from numerous excavations carried out by Blank were ultimately divided between CSU and KSU, with some material being in the possession at CWRU for a time. There is no information available to Cleveland State regarding the potential past division of material culture between these institutions regarding the Knapp Site. The site is associated with the Late Woodlands Period (900-1650CE) and has been culturally associated with the Mohican Peoples and their descendants, namely the Stockbridge-Munsee. Cleveland State University has no records of any potentially hazardous substances used in the treatment and preservation practice of any of these human remains or associated funerary objects.

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

Cleveland State University has determined that:

• The human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of no fewer than three individuals of Native American ancestry.

• The four 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 Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, Cleveland State University must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects are considered a single request and not competing requests. Cleveland State University is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice 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.

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

A total of one cultural item has been requested for repatriation. The one object of cultural patrimony is a basket. This basket (A5-1092, other number A5-452) is twined tule bowl, and was donated to the museum in 1964. Gerald Smith collected this basket from “Eyak Ind., Alaska” as written on the paper tag at the bottom of the basket. The basket's pattern is consistent with known Eyak designs, and materials such as natural and dyed spruce root were analyzed. There is no known presences of potentially hazardous substances used to treat this item.

The San Bernardino County Museum has determined that:

• The one object of cultural patrimony described in this notice has ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group, including any constituent sub-group (such as a band, clan, lineage, ceremonial society, or other subdivision), according to the Native American traditional knowledge of an Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

• There is a connection between the cultural item described in this notice and the Native Village of Eyak (Cordova).

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the San Bernardino County 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 San Bernardino County Museum is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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

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

Human remains representing, at least, two individuals have been identified from two mounds in Pottawatomie County, KS (UBS 1991-64). The 448 associated funerary objects are beads, an animal bone pendant, shark teeth, bone awls, bone hairpin fragments, projectile points, brass tweezers, a pebble, and animal bone fragments. W.J Griffing removed these remains and objects and gave them to KSHS in 1881. To our knowledge, no known hazardous substances were used to treat the human remains or associated funerary objects.

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

The KSHS has determined that:

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

• The 448 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 Kaw Nation, Oklahoma and The Osage Nation.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the KSHS 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 KSHS 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.

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

A total of four cultural items have been requested for repatriation. The four objects of cultural patrimony are one Bear Mask, one Raven Rattle, one Chilkat Blanket, and one Brown Bear Shirt. In the mid-to late nineteenth century, four cultural items were removed from undisclosed sites in unknown counties in southeastern Alaska. Documentation regarding their removal and/or subsequent transfers prior to their accession into the Eiteljorg Museum's collection is scarce. Preceding the foundation of the Eiteljorg Museum in June 1989 by Harrison Eiteljorg, these four cultural items were part of the personal collection of Harrison Eiteljorg.

According to museum records, three of these four cultural items are identified as Tlingit, and the other, Haida. The Bear Mask was previously owned by John A. Buxton of Shango Galleries, and was purchased by Harrison Eiteljorg on November 15, 1979. The Mask, dated circa 1880, is carved from a single piece of wood, highlighting prominent ears indicative of a bear, as well as eyebrows, and a mouth. The irises and teeth have abalone shell inlay; the ears' edges are inlayed, accentuating a contoured red pigmented pattern within the bear's ears. Hair is attached to the back of each ear and affixed to the back of the mask is a leather strap for the wearer. The Raven Rattle, dated circa 1830, was purchased by Harrison Eiteljorg from Parke-Bernet Galleries, in April 25, 1981; it was originally owned by Leon and Polly Gordon Miller of Ohio. It is made of carved cedar that has been halved and the center was carved out to hold metal balls (possibly lead shot). The two pieces of wood are nailed together with four metal nails, and the rattle is elaborately carved, featuring two birds (Raven and Kingfisher) and a horizontal human figure, painted all over with red and black pigment. The Chilkat Blanket, dated 1900-1910, was purchased by Harrison Eiteljorg from John A. Buxton of Shango Galleries probably in 1979, and it became a part of the Museum's permanent collection on November 21, 1991. It is not known how the Blanket was acquired by Buxton. It is of a double Killer Whale design, facing away from one another, dyed with natural dyes in yellow, light blue, and black. It is woven from Mountain Goat ( Oreamnos americanus ) and yellow cedar, twisted wool and cedar fringe edge the sides and bottom of the blanket. The Brown Bear Shirt, dated circa 1880, was purchased by Harrison Eiteljorg from Howard Roloff on April 8, 1981. It is constructed of dark brown wool trimmed with red fabric sewn around the edges of the neckline, armholes, and hem; a Grizzly bear design forms the shirt's central pattern. Shark teeth have been sewn within the mouth of the top central figure's mouth to represent bear's teeth. Mother of Pearl discs were sewn on to create the irises of the two figures and stitched on Dentalium tube-like shells function as the outline of the two figures. Abalone shell pieces configure the lower lip of the bottom figure and abalone buttons adorn the Grizzly bear's inner ears.

During consultation with representatives of the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Tribes (hereafter Central Council), they identified the Bear Mask (Xhoots L'axh'keit), Raven Rattle (Yéil Sheixhooxh), Brown Bear Shirt (Xhoots Kudás), and Chilkat Blanket (Naaxhein) as objects of cultural patrimony. Northwest Coast art historian Bill Holm referred to the Bear Mask as a headdress or helmet crest; per the Central Council, the Bear Mask is clan-owned, belonging to the entire clan and not just the person who is charged with being its caretaker; moreover, a clan needs the hat to be able to speak to their ancestors. The Brown Bear Shirt or sleeveless tunic (kanna.át) contains clan crests and since Dentalium (Tax'xee) were an expensive trade item, only wealthy clan members worn them during special events. The Raven Rattle is typically a part of a clan chief's ceremonial regalia but it is also considered imbued with life—a voice—integral to the imparting of oral traditions from generation to generation. During consultation of the Chilkat, it was disclosed that this Blanket was most likely woven by a master weaver whose work reflects a year's worth of time. Additionally, the Blanket is an all in one design, not divided into three sections. Chilkat Blankets are the communal property of a clan, not an individual as they represent the clan's crest or animals with distinct facial features in Northwest Coast formline design. They are still worn by the wealthiest clan leaders during important events such as a Potlatch and are literally deemed as “titles of ownership.”

As indicated through museum records and consultation with the Central Council, the cultural affiliation of the three cultural items is Tlingit, the Brown Bear Shirt as Haida. According to Tlingit oral tradition, the Tlingit people have owned and occupied southeastern Alaska since time immemorial. And according to Haida oral tradition, the Haida people have occupied Haida Gwaii since time immemorial. In the early eighteenth century, the Kaigani Haida (with which the Brown Bear Shirt is culturally affiliated) migrated north, settling next to the Tlingit. As Potlatches were outlawed in 1884, many cultural belongings of both the Tlingit and Haida were destroyed or became part of museum collections in North America and around the world.

The Eiteljorg Museum has determined that:

• The four 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 Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Eiteljorg 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 Eiteljorg Museum is responsible for sending a copy of this notice to the Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations identified in this notice and to any other consulting parties.

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

This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA. The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Dominican University of California, 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.

The one associated funerary object is one box of botanical and soil materials. There are no individuals that have been identified.

The items derive from a collection of archaebotanist Eric Wohlgemuth who was part of a archeological impact assessment team commissioned by Dominican University of California, formerly Dominican College, between 1996-1997. The units were excavated from the archeological site CA-MRN-254, where Dominican University of California is situated in San Rafael, CA. Eric Wohlgemuth's flotation study involved the removal of the botanical and soil materials, at total of five samples, and were later deposited at UC Davis. Traditional knowledge was relied on for the determination of these as associated funerary objects.

The affiliation of the above collections is with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, California. Dominican University is unaware of any treatment of the associated funerary objects with pesticides, preservatives, or other substances. However, Dominican University has not conducted any pesticide testing.

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.

The Dominican University of California has determined that:

• The one box 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 associated funerary objects described in this notice and the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, California.

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

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

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

Repatriation of the associated funerary objects described in this notice to a requestor may occur on or after June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the Dominican University of California 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 Dominican University of California 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.

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

Human remains representing, at least, three individuals have been identified. The individuals were removed from an unknown location on an unknown date and eventually acquired by the School of Dentistry at Oregon Health & Sciences University (OHSU) for teaching purposes. In August 2022, the ancestors were evaluated by an osteologist and determined to be Native American. Addition assessments requested by consulting Tribes were completed in 2024 and 2025. Information from those assessments suggest that based on evidence of Chinook-style cranial modifications, the individuals are possibly from an area along the mid-lower Columbia River region in Oregon or Washington, or the northern part of the Willamette Valley region, OR. No associated funerary objects are present.

Human remains representing, at least, one individual have been identified. On an unknown date, the human remains were removed from an unknown geographic location and acquired by Dr. Sard Wiest, a physician who lived and worked in Portland at the University of Oregon School of Medicine, now Oregon Health & Sciences University (OHSU). On April 29, 1949, Dr. Sard Wiest's wife donated the ancestor to OHSU after Dr. Wiest's passing in July 1948. It's unknown how Dr. Wiest acquired the ancestor, and they were then housed within the Medical Museum Collection. In August 2022, the ancestor was evaluated by an osteologist to determine if they were Native American. Additional osteological assessments were completed in May 2024 and January 2025 after receiving requests from consulting Tribes. The information from those assessments show that the ancestor is Native American with a lambda-occipital cranial modification (cradleboard). Based on the collection history of OHSU, Dr. Sard Wiest's location in Portland, OR, and biological evidence provided in the osteology assessments, it's likely that the ancestor was removed from the greater mid-lower Columbia River region in Oregon or Washington, or the northern Willamette Valley region, Oregon.

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

OHSU has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation; Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon; Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon; Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation; Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon; Cowlitz Indian Tribe; Nez Perce Tribe; and the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe of the Shoalwater Bay Indian Reservation.

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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, OHSU 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. OHSU 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.

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

Human remains representing at least seven individuals have been identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The individuals described in this notice represent four inventories from unknown locations in Pemiscot County, Missouri, designated as 23PMUNPROV1, 23PMUNPROV3, 23PMUNPROV4, and 23PMUNPROV5. Site 23PMUNPROV1 was donated to the University of Missouri as part of the Barkshire Collection, although the dates of collection and acquisition for all four collections are unknown. The University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology is not aware of any potentially hazardous substances used to treat human remains from this collection.

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

The University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology has determined that:

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

• There is a connection between the human remains described in this notice and the Quapaw Nation and The Osage Nation.

Written requests for repatriation of 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 June 29, 2026. If competing requests for repatriation are received, the University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology must determine the most appropriate requestor prior to repatriation. Requests for joint repatriation of human remains are considered a single request and not competing requests. The University of Missouri, Museum of Anthropology 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.

Background. —On November 8, 2024, the President, pursuant to section 203 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2253) (Trade Act), issued Proclamation 10857, imposing a safeguard measure on imports of fine denier PSF, in the form of a quantitative restriction on imports of fine denier PSF admitted temporarily free of duty under bond and entered under subheading 5503.20.00. The proclamation was published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2024 (89 FR 92015). The measure took effect on November 23, 2024, for a period of four years, or through November 22, 2028. The President imposed the measure following receipt of a report from the Commission in August 2024 under section 202 of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 2252) that contained an affirmative determination, remedy recommendations, and certain additional findings (see Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber, investigation No. TA-201-78, USITC Publication 5536, August 2024).

Section 204(a)(1) of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 2254(a)(1)) requires the Commission to monitor developments with respect to the domestic industry, including the progress and specific efforts made by workers and firms in the domestic industry to make a positive adjustment to import competition, as long as any action under section 203 of the Trade Act remains in effect. Whenever the initial period of such an action exceeds 3 years, section 204(a)(2) requires the Commission to submit a report on the results of the monitoring to the President and the Congress no later than the mid-point of the initial period of the relief—in this case by November 23, 2026. Section 204(a)(3) requires the Commission to hold a hearing in the course of preparing such report.

For further information concerning the conduct of this investigation, hearing procedures, 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 206, subparts A and F (19 CFR part 206).

Participation in the investigation and public service list. —Persons wishing to participate in the investigation as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11 of the Commission's rules, not later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . The Secretary will prepare a service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to this investigation upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance.

Limited disclosure of confidential business information (CBI). —Pursuant to section 206.17 of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make CBI gathered in this investigation available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 CFR 206.17(a)(3)(iii)) under an administrative protective order (APO) issued in the investigation, provided that the application is made not later than 21 days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register . A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive CBI under the APO.

The Commission may include CBI in the report it sends to the President and to the U.S. Trade Representative. Additionally, all information, including CBI, submitted in this investigation may be disclosed to and used by (i) the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel for cybersecurity purposes.

The Commission will not release information which the Commission considers to be confidential business information unless the party submitting the confidential business information had notice, at the time of submission, that such information would be released by the Commission, or such party subsequently consents to the release of the information. The Commission will not otherwise disclose any CBI in a manner that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information.

Public hearing. —As required by statute, the Commission has scheduled a hearing in connection with this investigation. The hearing will be held beginning at 9:30 a.m. on October 1, 2026, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission by no later than 5:15 p.m. on September 25, 2026. All persons desiring to appear at the hearing and make an oral presentation should participate in a prehearing conference to be held on September 28, 2026, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, if deemed necessary. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the hearing are governed by sections 201.6(b)(2), and 201.13(f) of the Commission's rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony in camera no later than 7 days prior to the date of the hearing.

Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov ). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice.

Written submissions. —Each party is encouraged to submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. The deadline for filing prehearing briefs is 5:15 p.m. on September 24, 2026. Parties may also file posthearing briefs. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is 5:15 p.m. on October 8, 2026. No posthearing brief shall exceed fifteen (15) pages of textual material, double-spaced and single sided, when printed out on pages measuring 8.5 x 11 inches. Persons are permitted to file answers to questions or requests made by the Commission at the hearing, which are separate from the 15-page limit for posthearing briefs. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the investigation may submit, by no later than 5:15 p.m. on October 8, 2026, a written statement concerning the matters to be addressed in the Commission's report to the President. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain CBI must also conform with the requirements of section 201.6 of the Commission's rules. Any CBI that is provided will be subject to limited disclosure under the APO (see above) and may be included in the report that the Commission sends to the President and the U.S. Trade Representative. The Commission's Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission's website at https://edis.usitc.gov, elaborates upon the Commission's rules with respect to electronic filing.

Additional written submissions to the Commission, including requests pursuant to section 201.12 of the Commission's rules, will not be accepted unless good cause is shown for accepting such submissions, or unless the submission is pursuant to a specific request by a Commissioner or Commission staff.

In accordance with section 201.16(c) of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by the 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.

Authority: This investigation is being conducted under the authority of section 204(a) of the Trade Act of 1974; this notice is published pursuant to section 206.3 of the Commission's rules.

The Commission instituted this investigation on February 2, 2026, based on a complaint filed by MolecuLight Inc. of Toronto, Ontario, Canada and MolecuLight Corp. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (collectively, “Complainants”). 91 FR 4629-30 (Feb. 2, 2026). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain medical imaging devices by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,438,356 (“the ‘356 patent”). Id. at 4629. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. The notice of investigation names two respondents: (1) Kent Imaging Inc. of Calgary, Alberta, Canada; and (2) Adiuvo Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. of Chennai, India (collectively, “Respondents”). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”) is also named as a party to this investigation. Id.

On May 8, 2026, Complainants filed a motion seeking leave to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to add the owner of the ‘356 patent, UHN, as a co-complainant in this investigation. Complainants' motion certified that neither Respondents nor OUII oppose the motion.

On May 11, 2026, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 12) granting Complainants' unopposed motion. The ID finds that Complainants' motion complies with Commission Rule 210.14(b), 19 CFR 210.14(b), and also finds that Complainants showed good cause to amend the complaint to add UHN as a co-complainant because “joinder would moot Respondents' pending motion for summary determination asserting that UHN is an indispensable party . . . and streamline discovery by avoiding international judicial process.” ID at 2. Complainants filed an amended complaint naming UHN as a co-complainant on May 12, 2026. No party filed a petition for review of the ID.

The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. Accordingly, the complaint and notice of investigation are amended to include UHN as a co-complainant.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on May 22, 2026.

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

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Abstract: Summarize the purpose of the form. The purpose of this form is to document the established terms and conditions of the volunteer service agreement between the student, the student's educational institution and our agency.

1. Type of Information Collection: New.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Student Volunteer Service Agreement.

3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form number: DEA-375. The sponsoring component is the Drug Enforcement Administration.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as the obligation to respond: Who will be asked/required to respond? Advise if the response necessary to provide service to the respondent? The host DEA office, the student, and the student's educational institution will be required to respond/approve. The host agency prepares the form, including duties and work assignment details to which the student will review and sign off. The educational institution should also review and sign off to confirm the students good standing.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The total or estimated number of respondents for the DEA-375 is 500. The time per response is 10 minutes.

6. An estimate of the total annual burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total annual burden hours for this collection is 83 hours and 20 minutes.

7. An estimate of the total annual cost burden associated with the collection, if applicable: $0.

If additional information is required contact: Darwin Arceo, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Enterprise Portfolio Management, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 4W-218, Washington, DC.