Title of Collection: County Committee Election.

OMB Control Number: 0560-0229.

Expiration Date of Approval: January 31, 2021.

Type of Request: Revision.

Abstract: This information collection is necessary to effectively allow farmers and ranchers to nominate potential candidates using the form FSA-669A for the FSA county committee election in accordance with the requirements as authorized by the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended. Specifically, FSA uses the information provided by the nominee annually or, if needed, throughout the year for special elections to create ballots for FSA county committee elections. Elections for FSA county committees are held each year; therefore, nominations for eligible nominees are requested each year. Any individual who meets the qualifications mentioned in form FSA-669A may be nominated by another person or by themselves. The form FSA-669A is used to collect the information for nominations; it requires the name and address of the nominee and the signatures of both the nominee and the person nominating the individual to be a nominee (only one signature is required for self-nominated individuals). The nominee must be eligible to vote in the designated FSA county committee election, eligible to hold the office of FSA county committee member, and willing to serve, if elected. For more information about FSA county committees, including elections, nominations, eligible voters, eligibility, and other related information, see the regulations in 7 CFR part 7. In addition, the form also includes a voluntary request for race, ethnicity, and gender information from the nominee. FSA is also using the form FSA-669A-3, Nomination Form for Urban Agriculture FSA Committee Election, to establish Urban Agriculture FSA County Committees in some cities.

The number of respondents increased by 500 in this collection due to more respondents interested in participating in the FSA county committee's election by either becoming an eligible voter or a County FSA committee member. The travel times decreased by 4,075 hours that have been removed from the collection. The respondents go to the county offices to do regular and customary business with FSA; this means no travel time is required specifically for the information collection and therefore, it is no longer included in the burden hour reporting.

For the following estimated total annual burden on respondents, the formula used to calculate the total burden hours is the estimated average time per response multiplied by the estimated total annual of responses.

Estimate of Average Time to Respond: Public reporting burden for collecting information under this notice is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information for all respondents.

Type of Respondents: Individuals (eligible voters).

Estimated Number of Respondents: 10,500.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Total Annual Reponses: 10,500.

Estimated Average Time per Response: 0.25 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 2,625 hours.

FSA is requesting comments on all aspects of this information to help us to:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Evaluate the quality, ability and clarity of the information technology; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who respond through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for Office of Management and Budget Approval.

On July 20, 2020, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated a less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of imports of standard steel welded wire mesh (wire mesh) from Mexico. 1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than December 7, 2020.

Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in an LTFV investigation within 140 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 733(c)(1)(A)(b)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner  2 makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request. Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

On November 2, 2020, the petitioners submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation. 3 The petitioners stated that their requested postponement “will permit the agency to issue supplemental questionnaires to Aceromex, S.A. de C.V. (Aceromex) to clarify its initial responses and to accurately determine the magnitude of dumping that occurred during the period of investigation.”  4

For the reasons stated above and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, Commerce, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination by 50 days ( i.e., 190 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated). As a result, Commerce will issue its preliminary determination no later than January 26, 2021. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless postponed at a later date.

This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

On July 20, 2020, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated the less-than-fair value (LTFV) investigation of imports of seamless refined copper pipe and tube (copper pipe and tube) from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam). 1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than December 7, 2020.

Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in an LTFV investigation within 140 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 733(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request. Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

On November 5, 2020, the petitioner  2 submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determination in this LTFV investigation. 3 The petitioner stated that it requests postponement to provide adequate time for Commerce to analyze complex issues, to accommodate extensions of time provided to the respondent to complete the questionnaire and supplemental questionnaires, and to provide Commerce additional time to conduct a thorough analysis, including by issuing additional supplemental questionnaires. 4

For the reasons stated above and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, Commerce, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination by 50 days ( i.e., 190 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated). As a result, Commerce will issue its preliminary determination no later than January 26, 2021. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination in this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless postponed at a later date.

This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

The Bureau revises its Privacy Act System of Records Notice (SORN) “CFPB.016—CFPB Advisory Boards and Committees Records System” to be renamed “CFPB.016 CFPB Advisory Committees Records System.” As such, references to “board and committees” are changed to “advisory committees” throughout for accuracy. The Bureau modifies the categories of individuals in the system to include any individuals, including general members of the public, who apply to serve on the Bureau's advisory committees. Additionally, this modification clarifies that individuals may be recommended to serve on the boards or councils, not nominated, as previously noted. The Bureau also modifies the categories of records to: (1) Clarify that citizenship and/or resident status may be included as information collected to determine an individual's eligibility to serve on the advisory committees; and (2) include demographic information, such as gender and race/ethnicity information, to carry out the Bureau's interest in ensuring diversity. Furthermore, the Bureau modifies the policies and practices for the retention and disposal of records to include the approved general records schedule for maintaining records pertinent to the administration of the advisory committees. In addition, the Bureau makes non-substantive edits to Routine Use 8 to clarify its purpose; the actual disclosure permitted under the Routine Use remains unchanged. Finally, the Bureau is making non-substantive revisions to the SORN to align with the Office of Management and Budget's recommended model in Circular A-108, appendix II.

The report of the revised system of records has been submitted to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Office of Management and Budget, pursuant to OMB Circular A-108, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Review, Reporting, and Publication under the Privacy Act” (Dec. 2016), 1 and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a(r).

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. The EM SSAB, Hanford, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Gary Younger at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the telephone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or within five business days after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Gary Younger. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Gary Younger's office at the address or telephone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/hab/FullBoardMeetingInformation.

In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 430.27(g)), DOE gives notice of the issuance of an Extension of Waiver as set forth below. The Extension of Waiver extends the Decision and Order granted to GEA (then GE Appliances) on February 12, 2015 (80 FR 7851, “February 2015 Decision and Order”) to include GEA basic model G30W_C-9I-BI_N, as requested by GEA on June 29, 2020. 1 GEA must test and rate the specifically identified G30W_C-9I-BI_N basic model in accordance with the alternate test procedure specified in the February 2015 Decision and Order. GEA's representations concerning the energy consumption of the specified basic models must be based on testing according to the provisions and restrictions in the alternate test procedure set forth in the February 2015 Decision and Order, and the representations must fairly disclose the test results. Distributors, retailers, and private labelers are held to the same requirements when making representations regarding the energy consumption of these products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))

DOE makes decisions on waiver extensions for only those basic models specifically set out in the request, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. GEA may submit a new or amended petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as appropriate, for additional basic models of consumer refrigeration products. Alternatively, if appropriate, GEA may request that DOE extend the scope of a waiver to include additional basic models employing the same technology as the basic model(s) set forth in the original petition consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(g).

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 12, 2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register.

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”)  1 authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part B  2 of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency for certain types of consumer products. These products include refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(1)) EPCA also contains provisions that enable the Secretary of Energy to classify additional types of consumer products as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) In a final determination of coverage published in the Federal Register on July 18, 2016 (the “July 2016 Final Coverage Determination”), DOE classified miscellaneous refrigeration products (“MREFs”) as covered products under EPCA. 81 FR 46768. MREFs are consumer refrigeration products other than refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, or freezers, which include coolers and combination cooler refrigeration products. 10 CFR 430.2. Combination cooler refrigeration products ( e.g., wine chillers combined with a refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer) are the subject of this extension.

The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. (42 U.S.C. 6296)

The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the product complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))

Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, coolers, and combination cooler refrigeration products is contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A—Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products (“Appendix A”).

Any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). DOE will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy or water consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). DOE may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. Id.

A petitioner may request that DOE extend the scope of a waiver or an interim waiver to include additional basic models employing the same technology as the basic model(s) set forth in the original petition, without limiting an extension to products of the same class. 10 CFR 430.27(g). DOE will publish any such extension in the Federal Register. Id.

On February 12, 2015, DOE issued a Decision and Order in Case Number RF-042 granting GEA a waiver to test certain consumer refrigerator-freezer basic models subject to the original Decision and Order using an alternate test procedure. 80 FR 7851 (“February 2015 Decision and Order”). 3 GEA stated that its refrigerator-freezers with a dual-compressor design were not properly accounted for in DOE's final test procedure rule published on April 21, 2014 (78 FR 22320) because these basic models demonstrate non-uniform cycling of their compressors, which prevents the verification of two criteria in the Appendix A test procedure—to ensure (a) that the first part of the test comprises a period of stable operation, and (b) that the second part of the test (used to measure the energy use contribution of the defrost cycle(s)) both starts and ends during periods of stable operation. 80 FR 7852.

Based on its review, including of the information provided by GEA, DOE determined that the current test procedure at Appendix A would evaluate the refrigerator-freezer basic models specified in the February 2015 Decision and Order in a manner so unrepresentative of their true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 80 FR 7852-7853. The February 2015 Decision and Order specifies that GEA must test and rate the subject basic models such that the stability requirements for the first part of the test are adapted to dual-compressor cycling and the period selection and duration for the second part of the test are adapted to dual-compressor cycling and defrosting. Id. Additionally, the unit must be run for a stabilization period of at least 24 hours preceding the test at each temperature control setting, and the test measurement frequency requirements made more stringent to a maximum of 1 minute per sample. Id.

On June 29, 2020, GEA submitted a petition for waiver and interim waiver for a certain basic model of a combination cooler refrigeration product, which uses the same dual-compressor technology with non-uniform compressor cycling as the residential refrigerator-freezer basic models subject to the February 2015 Decision and Order. Both combination cooler refrigeration products and refrigeration-freezers must be tested according to Appendix A. 10 CFR 430.23(a) and (ff). In its June 29, 2020 petition, GEA suggested the same alternate test procedure as prescribed in the February 2015 Decision and Order be used for the subject basic model. For these reasons, DOE is treating this petition for waiver and interim waiver as a request for an extension under 10 CFR 430.27(g) and that the scope of the waiver, Case Number RF-042, be extended to the GEA cooler-freezer basic model G30W_C-9I-BI_N. DOE is publishing at the end of this document GEA's request for extension of waiver in its entirety.

DOE has reviewed GEA's waiver extension request and determined that the G30W_C-9I-BI_N basic model identified in GEA's request incorporates the same design characteristics as those basic models covered under the waiver in Case Number RF-042 such that the test procedure evaluates that basic model in a manner that is unrepresentative of its actual energy use. The basic model G30W_C-9I-BI_N specified in GEA's request is a combination cooler refrigeration product (a cooler-freezer). As noted, the specified combination cooler refrigeration product is subject to testing according to Appendix A, the Federal test procedure from which GEA was granted a waiver in Case Number RF-042. Moreover, the subject basic model uses the same technology as the basic models of refrigerator-freezers subject to the alternate test procedure specified in the February 2015 Decision and Order. DOE has determined that the alternate procedure specified in the February 2015 Decision and Order will allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of the combination cooler refrigeration product basic model identified by GEA in its waiver extension request.

After careful consideration of all the material submitted by GEA in this matter, it is ordered that:

(1) GEA must, as of the date of publication of this Extension of Waiver in the Federal Register, test and rate the following basic model with the alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph (2):

(2) The alternate test procedure for the GEA basic model referenced in paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and miscellaneous refrigeration products prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A, with the following modifications:

The energy consumption shall be determined as follows:

GE Appliances, a Haier company (GEA) respectfully submits this Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver from the Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products in 10 CFR 430 Subpart B, Appendix A. GEA's request is fully consistent with the previously granted waiver provided to GEA under Case Number RF-042, 80 FR 7851.

GEA requests this waiver and interim waiver for the same reason as its previous waiver request: The current test procedure for dual compressor models is not applicable to GEA's models that demonstrate non-uniform compressor cycling. GEA requests expedited treatment of this Petition and Application as DOE has considered this exact issue before and approved the petition. This supplemental waiver request is filed only to add new basic models to the existing waiver.

GEA is a leading US manufacturer of home appliances. GEA offers a full suite of major appliances across seven brands as well as portable appliances. GEA has been a participant in and contributor to the DOE's home appliance energy conservation program since its founding more than 40 years ago. Indeed, GEA supports the goal of the appliance efficiency program: Maximizing energy savings improvements that offer consumers real economic benefits and that do not diminish product performance. GEA devotes substantial resources to the development of new technologies to increase energy efficiency where they are feasible and engineering products to meet the demanding DOE energy efficiency requirements.

This Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver covers the combination cooler refrigeration product basic model listed below.

The basic model will be distributed in commerce under the brand name “Monogram”.

The basic model listed utilizes a dual compressor design. The non-uniform compressor cycling makes direct use of the Appendix A requirements for evaluating temperature stability problematic, if not impossible.

The current test procedure in Appendix A for Multiple-Compressor Products with Automatic Defrost, 4.2.3.4.2 requires that “For each compressor system, the compartment temperature averages for the first and last complete compressor cycles that lie completely within the second part of the test must be within 0.5 °F (0.3 °C) of the average compartment temperature measured for the first part of the test.” The non-uniform compressor cycles of this product prevent consistent application of these requirements. As DOE stated when granting GEA's previous petition, “DOE has reviewed the alternate test procedure and believes that it will allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of these products, while alleviating the testing problems associated with GE's implementation of a dual compressor system”. (80 FR 7853). Without a waiver, the basic models referenced above cannot be accurately tested and rated for energy consumption.

To GEA's knowledge, the only other models with similar design characteristic are those listed in GEA's previously granted waiver, which is cited above.

GEA requests that the alternate test procedure prescribed by DOE in the GEA waiver order at 80 FR 7851-7854 be used to measure the energy efficiency for the basic model referenced above.

The alternate test procedure instructions for this waiver are included in Exhibit A. They are identical to the alternate test procedure approved by DOE in 80 FR 7851-7854.

This Petition for Waiver is likely to be granted as an identical waiver has already been granted to GEA. The alternate test procedure, previously approved by DOE, is applicable to the basic models' design characteristics and will evaluate the performance of the models in a manner representative of the actual energy consumption.

If DOE does not promptly grant an interim waiver, GEA will likely be unable to test and certify this model within a commercially reasonable time. Such delay will prevent effective competition within the marketplace and place GEA at an unfair competitive disadvantage.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(c), upon publication of a grant of interim waiver, GEA will notify in writing all known manufacturers of domestically marketed basic models of the same product class (as specified in 10 CFR 430.32) and of other product classes known to the petitioner to use the technology or have the characteristic at issue in the waiver. The notice will include a statement that DOE has published the interim waiver and petition for waiver in the Federal Register and the date the petition for waiver was published. The notice will also include a statement that DOE will receive and consider timely written comments on the petition for waiver. Within five working days of publication of the grant of interim waiver, GEA will file with DOE a statement certifying the names and addresses of each person to whom a notice of the petition for waiver was sent.

GEA respectfully requests that DOE grant this Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver from the current test procedure for the specified basic models. As DOE has already reviewed and approved an identical request for GEA, GEA requests expedited review and approval of the application for Interim Waiver.

Attachments:

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No.: New; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Office of Legacy Management Interpretive Centers' Meeting Room Webforms; (3) Type of Request: New; (4) Purpose: To create an evergreen webform for meeting room requests from stakeholders for the Office of Legacy Management (LM) Interpretive Centers; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 234; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 234; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 234; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $14,941.16.

Division A, Title III, and 132 STAT. 2913 of Public Law 115-244: Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2019.

• Act Enacted FY 2019 appropriations for DOE Office of Legacy Management's mission of Long-Term Stewardship which includes outreach activities required to operate the interpretative centers.

Division C, Title III, and 133 STAT. 2675 of Public Law 116-94: Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020.

• Act Enacted FY 2020 appropriations for DOE Office of Legacy Management's mission of Long-Term Stewardship which includes outreach activities required to operate the interpretative centers.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 12, 2020, by Carmelo Melendez, Director, Office of Legacy Management, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of this Board is to make recommendation to DOE-SC with respect to the basic energy sciences research program.

Tentative Agenda:

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. A webcast of this meeting will be available. Please check the website below for updates and information on how to view the meeting. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact Katie Runkles at: katie.runkles@science.doe.gov. You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.

Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available within 30 days on the Basic Energy Sciences website at: https://science.osti.gov/bes/besac.

Join the internet-based WebEx consultations as follows:

Website (copy and paste the following link into a web browser): https://doe.webex.com/doe/j.php?MTID=m6efbda9c4dcc9ee60af3ec1e8c6749c3.

Meeting number (access code): 199 306 1256 and meeting password: FHsBbVEd473.

Join by telephone: +1-415-527-5035 US Toll or +1-929-251-9612 USA Toll 2.

Global call-in numbers: Join from a video system or application, dial 1993061256@doe.webex.com or dial 207.182.190.20 and enter your meeting number.

Website (Copy and paste the following link into a web browser): https://doe.webex.com/doe/j.php?MTID=m2f50ad361c6431dd4cc2d633b44a0e79.

Meeting number (access code): 199 543 4933 and meeting password: dJGjM7m3w34.

Join by telephone: +1-415-527-5035 US Toll or +1-929-251-9612 USA Toll 2.

Global call-in numbers: Join from a video system or application, dial 1995434933@doe.webex.com or dial 207.182.190.20 and enter your meeting number.

Any person who has plans to present a prepared general statement may request that copies of his or her statement be made available at the public meeting. Such persons may submit requests, along with an advance electronic copy of their statement in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format, to the appropriate address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice. The request and advance copy of statements must be received at least one week before the public meeting and may be emailed, hand-delivered, or sent by mail. DOE prefers to receive requests and advance copies via email. Please include a telephone number to enable DOE staff to make a follow-up contact, if needed.

DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing. Audio from the meeting will be recorded for the purpose of preparing a transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of the public meeting.

The public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference style. Each participant will be allowed to make a general statement (within time limits determined by DOE), before the discussion of specific topics.

DOE will permit, as time permits, other participants to comment briefly on any general statements. At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit participants to clarify their statements briefly and comment on statements made by others. Participants should be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other relevant matters. The official conducting the public meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any further procedural rules or modification of the above procedures that may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting.

A transcript of each public meeting will be included in the Administrative Record accompanying the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

In accordance with MEBA section 5(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. 6939f(b)(1), this consultation opportunity is intended for persons who are likely to deliver elemental mercury to a designated facility for long-term management and storage and other interested persons (Persons). DOE will conduct multiple, internet-based webinar (WebEx) meetings to facilitate consultation with Persons seeking to provide input on the assessment and collection of a fee for providing long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. During the initial WebEx meeting, DOE will present information on topics DOE considers relevant and applicable to establishing a fee including: (1) Potential Alternative Locations for Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury ( e.g., existing DOE-owned facilities, facilities owned by other Federal Government agencies, or commercially-owned facilities), (2) Fee that Covers Costs for Long-Term Management and Storage ( e.g., storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal), (3) Inputs and Assumptions that Affect Cost ( e.g., quantities of elemental mercury and storage durations), (4) Cost Elements ( e.g., Operations and Maintenance and other costs) and MEBA Recoverable/Non-Recoverable Costs, and, (5) Fee Determination method ( e.g., calculation/formula/model). DOE will also present information on the process it will follow to prepare and issue a fee for long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. DOE invites consultation input from Persons on the information presented and on topics Persons consider relevant and applicable to establishing a fee.

DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date specified previously in the DATES section of this document, comments and information on matters addressed in this document and on other matters relevant to DOE's development of the fee for the long term management and storage of elemental mercury. After the close of the comment period, DOE will consider the public comments received in the development of the fee.

Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page requires you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies Office staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.

However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.

Do not submit to http://www.regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (“CBI”)). Comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section.

DOE processes submissions made through http://www.regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that http://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.

Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail also will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments.

Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No telefacsimiles (“faxes”) will be accepted.

Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.

Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email to mercury.mgt.fee@em.doe.gov. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 12, 2020, by Mark A. Gilbertson, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Office of Regulatory and Policy Affairs, Office of Environmental Management, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to provide advice on a continuing basis to the Director, Office of Science of the Department of Energy, on the many complex scientific and technical issues that arise in the development and implementation of the fusion energy sciences program.

Tentative Agenda:

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make an oral statement regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact Dr. Barish at sam.barish@science.doe.gov (Email). Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements during the Public Comment time on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for on the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee website— http://science.energy.gov/fes/fesac/.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No.: New; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Office of Legacy Management Interpretive Centers' Field Trip and Outreach Program Webforms; (3) Type of Request: New; (4) Purpose: To create an evergreen webform for Field Trip and Outreach Program requests from stakeholders for the Office of Legacy Management (LM) Interpretive Centers; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 391; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 391; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 471; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $30,742.71.

Division A, Title III, and 132 STAT. 2913 of Public Law 115-244: Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2019.

• Act Enacted FY 2019 appropriations for DOE Office of Legacy Management's mission of Long-Term Stewardship which includes outreach activities required to operate the interpretative centers.

Division C, Title III, and 133 STAT. 2675 of Public Law 116-94: Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020.

• Act Enacted FY 2020 appropriations for DOE Office of Legacy Management's mission of Long-Term Stewardship which includes outreach activities required to operate the interpretative centers.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 12, 2020, by Carmelo Melendez, Director, Office of Legacy Management, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register.

Title: FERC-725S, Emergency Preparedness and Operations (EOP) Reliability Standards.

OMB Control No.: 1902-0270.

Type of Request: Three-year approval of the FERC-725S information collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting requirements.

Abstract: The Electricity Modernization Act of 2005, which is Title XII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), added a new section 215 to the Federal Power Act (FPA). 1 FPA section 215 requires a Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO, subject to Commission oversight, or by the Commission independently.

Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight or by the Commission independently. In 2006, the Commission certified North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the ERO pursuant to section 215 of the FPA. FERC-725S consists of Emergency Preparedness and Operations (EOP) Reliability Standards, EOP-004-4 (Event Reporting), EOP-005-3 (System Restoration from Blackstart Resources), EOP-006-3 (System Restoration Coordination), and EOP-008-2 (Loss of Control Center Functionality), EOP-010-1 (Geomagnetic Disturbance Operations), and EOP-011-1 (Emergency Operations). Reliability standards EOP-004-4, EOP-005-3, EOP-006-3 and EOP-008-2, EOP-010-1, and EOP-011-1, EOP Reliability Standards will enhance reliability by:

(1) Providing accurate reporting of events to NERC's event analysis group to analyze the impact on the reliability of the bulk electric system (Reliability Standard EOP-004-4).

(2) delineating the roles and responsibilities of entities that support system restoration from blackstart resources which generate power without the support of the bulk electric system (Reliability Standard EOP-005-3).

(3) clarifying the procedures and coordination requirements for reliability coordinator personnel to execute system restoration processes (Reliability Standard EOP-006-3).

(4) refining the required elements of an operating plan used to continue reliable operations of the bulk electric system in the event that primary control center functionality is lost (Reliability Standard EOP-008-2).

(5) address the effects of operating Emergencies by ensuring each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority has developed Operating Plan(s) to mitigate operating Emergencies, and that those plans are coordinated within a Reliability Coordinator Area (EOP-010-1).

(6) streamlines the requirements for Emergency operations of the Bulk Electric System. Attachment 1, which is incorporated into Requirements R2 and R6, provides the process and descriptions of the levels used by the Reliability Coordinator when communicating the condition of a Balancing Authority that is experiencing an Energy Emergency (EOP-011-1).

Type of Respondents: Public utilities subject to the FPA.

Estimate of Annual Burden   2 and cost   3 : The Commission estimates there will be no changes in the annual public reporting burden for the FERC-735S, as follows:

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

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

Abstract: The proposed information collection activity will garner qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the government's commitment to improving service delivery. By qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions, but not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences, and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training, or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative, and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, course materials, course instructor, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform 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 on the Agency's services will be unavailable.

The Agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:

• The collections are voluntary;

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

• The collections are the only way to collect information; there are no alternative existing sources;

• The collections are noncontroversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program;

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

• Information gathered will be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency;

• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and

• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study.

Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information, but it does not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: The target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential nonresponse bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

Pursuant to the PRA and OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), the EEOC solicits public comment on its intent to seek a three-year approval of this revised collection: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the EEOC's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the EEOC's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

In addition to clearance hours for the previously approved customer feedback forms, the EEOC is also requesting an additional 39,716 clearance hours. Most of these requested hours—39,116—are for a randomly-generated, pop-up form that will solicit feedback from a sample of visitors to the EEOC website on the contents and performance of the web pages. The 39,116 hour burden estimate is based on the number of web page views in a year. The remaining 600 hours represent a reserve to cover any additional feedback forms that may be developed over the next three years for new trainings offered by the EEOC. The EEOC anticipates any new potential feedback forms will be similar in length and content to existing feedback forms. The EEOC plans to seek clearance for the additional hours so the EEOC can use the existing clearance number if the need arises for additional training and feedback forms.

OMB Number: 3046-0048.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Individuals and households; businesses and organizations; State, Local or Tribal Governments.

Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: 6 known, up to 2 more anticipated.

Respondents: 1,211,052.

Annual Responses: 1,226,952.

Frequency of Response: Twice per respondent for one activity, and once for all other activities.

Average Minutes per Response: 2.2.

Burden Hours: 45,532.

On March 15, 2019, NIOSH published a request for public review in the Federal Register [ Federal Register Number 2019-04794] [84 FR 9524] on the draft versions of the documents skin notion profiles:

Five of these documents have been finalized and published: Chlorodiphenyl (42% chlorine) (CAS: 53469-21-9), Cyclohexanol (CAS: 108-93-0), Cyclohexanone (CAS: 108-94-1), Cyclonite (CAS: 121-82-4), and Diethylenetriamine (CAS: 111-40-0). All comments received were carefully reviewed and addressed, where appropriate. In response to comments received, revisions were made to clarify the data used by NIOSH in its support of the development of the skin notation assignments for these chemicals. NIOSH Skin Notation Profiles, Group E Responses to Peer Review and Public Comments can be found in the Supporting Documents section on www.regulations.gov for this docket. Comments for the draft documents on Beta-chloroprene (CAS: 126-99-8), Dioxane (CAS: 123-91-1), Diacetyl/2,3-Pentanedione (CAS: 431-03-8/600-14-6), Cholorodiphenyl (54% chlorine) (CAS: 110097-69-1) and Toluene diisocyanates (CAS: 584-84-9; 91-08-7; 26471-62-5) are still being considered by NIOSH.

In the Federal Register of June 11, 2010 (75 FR 33311), FDA announced the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Bioequivalence Recommendations for Specific Products,” which explained the process that would be used to make product-specific guidances available to the public on FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs.

As described in that guidance, FDA adopted this process to develop and disseminate product-specific guidances and to provide a meaningful opportunity for the public to consider and comment on the guidances. This notice announces the availability of a draft guidance on a generic tiotropium bromide inhalation spray.

FDA initially approved new drug application 21936 for SPIRIVA RESPIMAT (tiotropium bromide inhalation spray) in September 2015. We are now issuing draft guidance for industry on BE recommendations for generic tiotropium bromide inhalation spray (“Draft Guidance for Tiotropium Bromide”).

In October 2012, Boehringer Ingelheim, manufacturer of the reference listed drug SPIRIVA HANDIHALER, new drug application 21395, submitted a citizen petition requesting, among other things, that FDA adopt and apply certain requirements in its review of any proposed generic and follow-on versions of SPIRIVA HANDIHALER or any other Boehringer Ingelheim oral inhalation product containing the active ingredient tiotropium bromide under section 505(j) and (b)(2), respectively, of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j) and (b)(2)) (Docket No. FDA-2012-P-1072). FDA is reviewing the issues raised in the petition and will consider any comments on the draft guidance entitled “Draft Guidance for Tiotropium Bromide” before responding to Boehringer's citizen petition.

The draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on the information and data to demonstrate BE to support ANDAs for tiotropium bromide inhalation spray. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or https://www.regulations.gov.

In the Federal Register of Wednesday, January 8, 2020 (85 FR 915), appearing on page 916 in FR Doc. 2020-00075, the following correction is made:

On page 916, in the table, the entry for NDA 202342 is removed.

In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

This information collection helps to support implementation of section 503B of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA).

Under section 503B of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 353b), added by DQSA, a facility that compounds drugs may elect to register with FDA as an outsourcing facility. Drug products compounded in a registered outsourcing facility can qualify for exemptions from the FDA-approval requirements in section 505 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355), the requirement to label products with adequate directions for use under section 502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1)), and the requirements for drug supply chain security in section 582 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360eee-1) if the requirements in section 503B of the FD&C Act have been met.

After the initial registration, under section 503B(b) of the FD&C Act, a facility that elects to register with FDA as an outsourcing facility must also do so annually between October 1 and December 31. Upon registration, the outsourcing facility must provide specific information including its name, place of business, a unique facility identifier, and a point of contact's email address and phone number. The outsourcing facility must also indicate: (1) Whether it intends to compound, within the next calendar year, a drug that appears on our drug shortage list in effect under section 506E of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 356e); and (2) whether it compounds from bulk drug substances and, if so, whether it compounds sterile or non-sterile drugs from bulk drug substances.

Outsourcing facilities that elect to register submit registration information for each facility electronically using a Structured Product Labeling (SPL) format in accordance with the FDA guidance for industry entitled “Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format—Drug Establishment Registration and Drug Listing (May 2009).” The guidance is available from our website at: https://www.fda.gov/media/71146/download. Respondents unable to use electronic means to register may submit a written request for a waiver from the requirement.

Upon registration, and in accordance with section 503B and 744K of the FD&C Act, facilities are assessed an establishment fee and receive an annual invoice from FDA with instructions for remitting payment. Until payment is made for each given fiscal year (FY), an establishment is not considered to be registered as an outsourcing facility.

In accordance with section 744K of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379j-62), certain outsourcing facilities may qualify for a small business reduction in the amount of the annual establishment fee. To qualify for this reduction, an outsourcing facility must submit a written request to FDA certifying that the entity meets the requirements for the reduction. For each FY a firm seeks to qualify as a small business and receive the fee reduction, it must submit to FDA a written request by April 30 of the preceding FY. For example, an outsourcing facility must have submitted a written request for the small business reduction by April 30, 2020, to qualify for a reduction in the fiscal year 2021 annual establishment fee.

Section 744K also requires an outsourcing facility to submit written requests for a small business reduction in a specified format: Form FDA 3908 entitled “Outsourcing Facilities for Human Drug Compounding: Small Business Establishment Fee Reduction Request.” Form FDA 3908 is available from our website at: https://www.fda.gov/media/90740/download. In response to the submission of a small business reduction request, FDA will send a notification letter of its decision and recommends that applicants retain the notification.

In accordance with section 503B of the FD&C Act, outsourcing facilities are subject to inspection and, in accordance with section 744K, subject to reinspection fees. A reinspection fee will be incurred for each reinspection and is intended to reimburse FDA when a particular outsourcing facility requires reinspection because of noncompliance identified during a previous inspection. After a reinspection is conducted, FDA will send an invoice to the email address indicated in the facility's registration file. The invoice contains instructions for remitting the reinspection fee.

Agency regulations under § 10.75 (21 CFR 10.75) provide for internal Agency review of decisions. Accordingly, an outsourcing facility may request reconsideration of an FDA decision related to the fee provisions of section 744K of the FD&C Act. Requests for reconsideration should include the facility's rationale for its position that FDA's decision was in error and include any additional information that is relevant to the outsourcing facility's assertion. The denial of a request for reconsideration may be appealed by submitting a written request to FDA, consistent with § 10.75.

To assist respondents with the information collection provisions, we have developed Agency guidance. The guidance document entitled “Registration of Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing Facilities Under Section 503B of the FD&C Act (November 2014)” describes the process for electronic submission of establishment registration information for outsourcing facilities and provides information on how to obtain a waiver from submitting registration information electronically. The guidance document entitled “Fees for Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing Facilities Under Sections 503B and 744K of the FD&C Act (November 2014)” describes the types and amounts of fees that outsourcing facilities must pay, the adjustments to fees required by law, how outsourcing facilities can submit payment to FDA, the consequences of outsourcing facilities' failure to pay fees, and how an outsourcing facility can qualify as a small business to obtain a reduction in fees. The guidance documents were issued consistent with our good guidance practice regulations (21 CFR 10.115), which provide for public comment at any time, and are available on our website at https://www.fda.gov/media/87570/download and https://www.fda.gov/media/136683/download , respectively.

In the Federal Register of August 20, 2020 (85 FR 51442), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

We estimate the burden of the information collection as follows:

We estimate 70 respondents annually will submit outsourcing facility registrations using the SPL format as specified in Agency guidance and assume each registration will require 4.5 hours to prepare and complete. We expect no more than one waiver request from the electronic submission requirement annually and assume each waiver request will require 1 hour to prepare and submit. We estimate each of the 70 registrants will remit annual establishment fees and assume this task requires 30 minutes per respondent. We estimate that 15 of those respondents will request a small business reduction in the amount of the annual establishment fee using Form FDA 3908.

We estimate 14 outsourcing facilities annually will remit reinspection fees and assume this will require 30 minutes. We also estimate that we will receive three requests for reconsideration and one appeal of a denial of a request for reconsideration and assume 1 hour per respondent for this activity.

We estimate that annually 15 outsourcing facilities will maintain a copy of their small business designation letter and that maintaining each record will require 0.5 hour (30 minutes).

These estimates reflect a slight increase in the number of annual registrations, but a decrease in reinspection fee submissions.

On January 31, 2020, as a result of confirmed cases of COVID-19, and after consultation with public health officials as necessary, Alex M. Azar II, Secretary of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the authority under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d) (PHS Act), determined that a PHE exists and has existed since January 27, 2020, nationwide. 1 On March 13, 2020, President Donald J. Trump declared that the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States constitutes a national emergency, beginning March 1, 2020. 2

In the Federal Register of March 25, 2020 (85 FR 16949) (the March 25, 2020, notice) (available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-03-25/pdf/2020-06222.pdf ), FDA announced procedures for making available FDA guidances related to the COVID-19 PHE. These procedures, which operate within FDA's established good guidance practices regulations, are intended to allow FDA to rapidly disseminate Agency recommendations and policies related to COVID-19 to industry, FDA staff, and other stakeholders. The March 25, 2020, notice stated that due to the need to act quickly and efficiently to respond to the COVID-19 PHE, FDA believes that prior public participation will not be feasible or appropriate before FDA implements COVID-19-related guidances. Therefore, FDA will issue COVID-19-related guidances for immediate implementation without prior public comment (see section 701(h)(1)(C) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 371(h)(1)(C)) and § 10.115(g)(2)). The guidances are available on FDA's web pages entitled “COVID-19-Related Guidance Documents for Industry, FDA Staff, and Other Stakeholders” (available at: https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-issues/covid-19-related-guidance-documents-industry-fda-staff-and-other-stakeholders ) and “Search for FDA Guidance Documents” (available at: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents ).

The March 25, 2020, notice further stated that, in general, rather than publishing a separate NOA for each COVID-19-related guidance, FDA intends to publish periodically a consolidated NOA announcing the availability of certain COVID-19-related guidances that FDA issued during the relevant period, as included in table 1. This notice announces COVID-19-related guidances that are posted on FDA's website.

Pursuant to the process described in the March 25, 2020, notice, FDA is announcing the availability of the following COVID-19-related guidances:

Although these guidances have been implemented immediately without prior comment, FDA will consider all comments received and revise the guidances as appropriate (see § 10.115(g)(3)).

These guidances are being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (§ 10.115). The guidances represent the current thinking of FDA. They do not establish any rights for any person and are not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information (listed in table 2). Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in the following FDA regulations and guidances have been approved by OMB as listed in the following table:

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information (listed in table 3). Therefore, clearance by OMB under the PRA is not required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in the following FDA regulations have been approved by OMB as listed in the table below.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain COVID-19-related guidances at:

• FDA web page entitled “COVID-19-Related Guidance Documents for Industry, FDA Staff, and Other Stakeholders,” available at https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-issues/covid-19-related-guidance-documents-industry-fda-staff-and-other-stakeholders;

• FDA web page entitled “Search for FDA Guidance Documents” available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents; or

• https://www.regulations.gov.

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed revision of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

This information collection supports Agency regulations and associated guidance pertaining to expedited programs for serious conditions. The purpose of our regulations in 21 CFR part 312, subpart E is to establish procedures designed to expedite the development, evaluation, and marketing of new therapies intended to treat persons with life-threatening and severely debilitating illnesses, especially where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists. While the statutory standards of safety and effectiveness apply to all drugs, the many kinds of drugs that are subject to them, and the wide range of uses for those drugs, demand flexibility in applying the standards.

We have developed the guidance for industry entitled “Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics” as a single resource for information on FDA's policies and procedures related to the following expedited programs for serious conditions: (1) Fast track designation, (2) breakthrough therapy designation, (3) accelerated approval, and (4) priority review designation. The guidance describes threshold criteria generally applicable to expedited programs, including what is meant by serious condition, unmet medical need, and available therapy. The guidance addresses the applicability of expedited programs to rare diseases, clarification on available therapy, and additional detail on possible flexibility in manufacturing and product quality. It also clarifies the qualifying criteria for breakthrough therapy designation and provides examples of surrogate endpoints and intermediate clinical endpoints used to support accelerated approval.

A sponsor or applicant who seeks fast track designation is required to submit to us a request showing that the drug product: (1) Is intended for a serious or life-threatening condition and (2) has the potential to address an unmet medical need. We expect that most information to support a designation request will have been gathered under existing requirements for preparing an investigational new drug (IND), new drug application (NDA), or biologics license application (BLA). If such information has already been submitted to us, the information may be summarized in the fast track designation request. A designation request should include, where applicable, additional information not specified elsewhere by statute or regulation. For example, additional information may be needed to show that a product has the potential to address an unmet medical need where an approved therapy exists for the serious or life-threatening condition to be treated. Such information may include clinical data, published reports, summaries of data and reports, and a list of references. The amount of information and discussion in a designation request need not be voluminous, but it should be sufficient to permit a reviewer to assess whether the criteria for fast track designation have been met.

After we make a fast track designation, a sponsor or applicant may submit a premeeting package that may include additional information supporting a request to participate in certain fast track programs. The premeeting package serves as background information for the meeting and should support the intended objectives of the meeting. As with the request for fast track designation, we expect that most sponsors or applicants will have gathered such information to meet existing requirements for preparing an IND, an NDA, or a BLA. These may include descriptions of clinical safety and efficacy trials not conducted under an IND ( e.g., foreign studies) and information to support a request for accelerated approval. If such information has already been submitted to us, the information may be summarized in the premeeting package.

We also developed the guidance document entitled “Expedited Programs for Regenerative Medicine Therapies for Serious Conditions.” The guidance provides sponsors engaged in the development of regenerative medicine therapies for serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions with FDA's recommendations on the expedited development and review of these therapies. The guidance describes the expedited programs available to sponsors of regenerative medicine therapies for serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions, including those products designated as regenerative advanced therapies (which FDA refers to as “regenerative medicine advanced therapy” (RMAT) designation). The guidance also describes considerations in the clinical development of regenerative medicine therapies and opportunities for sponsors of regenerative medicine therapies to interact with the Center of Biologics Evaluation and Research review staff.

The guidance documents are available on our website at www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents and were issued consistent with our good guidance practice regulations in 21 CFR 10.115, which provide for public comment at any time.

We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Based on a review of the information collection since our last request for OMB approval, we have increased our burden estimates by 389 responses and 35,325 hours. As reflected in table 1, we estimate that 70 respondents will submit 101 requests for priority review designation annually. We assume an average of 30 hours is needed to prepare such a request.

We estimate that 119 respondents will submit 156 requests for breakthrough designation annually and assume that an average of 70 hours is needed to prepare such a request.

We estimate 205 respondents will submit 261 requests for fast track designation requests annually and assume that an average of 60 hours is needed to prepare such a request.

Of the requests for fast track designation made per year, we granted approximately 224 requests from 392 respondents, and for each of these granted requests, a premeeting package was submitted. We therefore assume an average burden of 100 hours per respondent for preparing a premeeting package.

Finally, we estimate 33 respondents will submit 38 requests for RMAT designation and assume that an average of 60 hours is needed to prepare such a request.

ACHDNC provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of HHS (Secretary) on the development of newborn screening activities, technologies, policies, guidelines, and programs for effectively reducing morbidity and mortality in newborns and children having, or at risk for, heritable disorders. The ACHDNC reviews and reports regularly on newborn and childhood screening practices, recommends improvements in the national newborn and childhood screening programs, and fulfills requirements stated in the authorizing legislation. In addition, ACHDNC's recommendations regarding inclusion of additional conditions for screening, following adoption by the Secretary, are evidence-informed preventive health services provided for in the comprehensive guidelines supported by HRSA through the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) pursuant to section 2713 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-13). Under this provision, non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance are required to provide insurance coverage without cost-sharing (a co-payment, co-insurance, or deductible) for preventive services for plan years ( i.e., policy years) beginning on or after the date that is one year from the Secretary's adoption of the condition for screening.

During the meeting, ACHDNC will hear from experts in the fields of public health, medicine, heritable disorders, rare disorders, and newborn screening. Agenda items include the following:

(1) Presentations on the decision making criteria and matrix used to evaluate conditions nominated to the RUSP;

(2) review of newborn screening implementation for the following RUSP conditions: Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), critical congenital heart disease (CCHD), Pompe disease, mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I), X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy (XALD); and

(3) overview of the Review of Newborn Screening for Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) report and vote on whether to submit this review to the Secretary.

In July 2018, SMA was added to the RUSP, and the Secretary requested a follow-up report that assesses the impact of implementing screening for SMA. Following the overview of the Review of Newborn Screening for Spinal Muscular Atrophy report, the Committee is expected to vote on whether to submit this review to the Secretary or whether further action is warranted prior to its submission.

The agenda for this meeting does not include any plans for recommending a condition for inclusion in the RUSP. Agenda items are subject to changes as priorities dictate. Information about the ACHDNC, including a roster of members and past meeting summaries, are also available on the ACHDNC website.

Members of the public also will have the opportunity to provide comments. Public participants may submit written statements in advance of the scheduled meeting. Oral comments will be honored in the order they are requested and may be limited as time allows. Requests to provide a written statement or make oral comments to the ACHDNC must be submitted via the registration website by Friday, November 27, 2020, by 10:00 a.m. ET.

Individuals who need special assistance or another reasonable accommodation should notify Alaina Harris at the address and phone number listed above at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

This meeting is being announced less than 15 days prior to the scheduled meeting due to an administrative issue that has now been resolved.

The following and all continuing U.S. and foreign patents/patent applications thereof are the intellectual properties to be licensed under the prospective agreement to SLU:

The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the Government of the United States of America, and Saint Louis University. The prospective patent license will be for the purpose of consolidating the patent rights to SLU, co-owner of said rights, for commercial development and marketing. Consolidation of these co-owned rights is intended to expedite development of the invention, consistent with the goals of the Bayh-Dole Act codified as 35 U.S.C. 200-212. The prospective patent license will be worldwide, exclusive, and may be limited to those fields of use commensurate in scope with the patent rights. It will be sublicensable, and any sublicenses granted by SLU will be subject to the provisions of 37 CFR part 401 and 404.

The invention pertains to methods for treating and preventing neuropathic pain by using selective antagonists for the P2Y14 receptor, a purinergic G protein-coupled receptor that is activated by extracellular UDP-glucose and related nucleotides. The technology provides a method of treating neuropathic pain by administering a P2Y14 receptor antagonist comprising a naphthalene or phenyl-triazolyl scaffold, potentially increase efficacy of treatments for neuropathic pain, and minimize risk of addiction.

This notice is made pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404. The prospective exclusive patent license will include terms for the sharing of royalty income with NIDDK from commercial sublicenses of the patent rights and may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice the NIDDK receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.

Complete applications for a license that are timely filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive patent license.

In response to this Notice, the public may file comments or objections. Comments and objections, other than those in the form of a license application, will not be treated confidentially, and may be made publicly available. License applications submitted in response to this Notice will be presumed to contain business confidential information and any release of information from these license applications will be made only as required and upon a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

The Coast Guard's current fleet of Medium Endurance Cutters (MEC) consists of 28 operational vessels homeported in the Coast Guard's area of responsibility (AOR) in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico. MECs primarily operate outside the 12 nm territorial seas and within the 200 nm Exclusive Economic Zone and primarily execute maritime law enforcement and search and rescue missions. Additional MEC operations occur in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, and the Pacific between California and Panama. Current operational MECs have exceeded their designed 30-year service life and can no longer meet this need for the Coast Guard. Therefore, the Coast Guard must replace the aging MECs because they are too old and costly to be operationally effective. Some of the oldest MECs are already more than 55 years old and do not have sufficient hull life remaining to justify any attempts to modernize them. Therefore, the purpose of the Proposed Action is the acquisition and operation of up to 25 OPCs to replace the capabilities of the current operational MECs. OPCs have identical missions and operational characteristics as the MECs they replace. OPC differences include increased length to accommodate a fixed hanger for assigned aircraft, larger flight deck, greater at-sea endurance, an increased number of cutter boats, and modernized Command, Control, Computers, Navigation, and Combat systems. OPCs also feature enhanced environmental standards for clean air, noise, sewage, trash, and ballast.

Preliminary Proposed Action (Alternative 1): Under the preliminary Proposed Action, the Coast Guard would acquire and operate up to 25 OPCs with planned design lives of 30 years to fulfill mission requirements in the proposed action areas in the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, and Pacific Ocean, including Alaska, Hawaii, and Pacific Islands. Similar to the current fleet's operations, the Proposed Action would include vessel and aircraft operations as well as shipboard training exercises to meet the Coast Guard's mission responsibilities. OPCs would support the Coast Guard's missions that generally occur more than 50 nm (92 km) from shore and require long transit time to reach the farthest extent of the Coast Guard's AORs, forward deployment of forces with the U.S. Navy for National Defense, and an extended on-scene vessel presence.

An OPC's typical deployment schedule would be to perform law enforcement activities, which include interdicting any vessel suspected of illegal or unsafe activity in U.S. waters ( e.g., fishing without appropriate permits, carrying excessive passengers, or transporting contraband). However, the OPC would be expected to perform other federally-mandated emergent ( e.g., hurricane disaster response) or non-emergent missions, typically without sufficient time to return to port for additional provisions or reconfiguration. These missions include Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security, Search and Rescue, Drug Interdiction, Migrant Interdiction, Living Marine Resource, Other Law Enforcement, and Defense Readiness. The OPC would also be required to enforce maritime environmental laws and regulations, escort vessels to protect national security, and to ensure safe maritime navigation. Coast Guard mandated missions are covered under Title 14 U.S.C. and 6 U.S.C. 468.

OPCs would carry up to three small, ridged hull inflatable over the horizon (OTH) boats, but only one to two OTH boats would be launched in support of OPC operations. Operations with OTH boats would enhance operational effectiveness by allowing for simultaneous boarding, inspecting, seizing, and neutralizing of surface targets of interest ( i.e., civilians suspected of breaking the law or requiring assistance). The OTH boats would also perform in situations and areas where it is either physically impossible or dangerous for the OPC to navigate. OTH boats would support activities such as vessel boardings, passenger transfers, and rescue of a person in distress.

All OPCs would be flight deck-equipped with the ability to launch, recover, hangar, and maintain manned ( i.e., helicopters) aircraft. The flight deck of the OPC would be capable of launching and recovering helicopters including all variants up to equivalent weight of a Sikorsky S-92. In general, helicopters supporting an OPC would either be from an embarked aviation detachment, or would fly from an established airstrip on shore either to the OPC or from the OPC to shore. Helicopter flights associated with the Proposed Action would occur in all Coast Guard AORs, and could be used for transport of personnel and equipment and for conducting training ( e.g., landing qualifications), in addition to supporting all OPC missions. All aircraft would follow the Coast Guard's Air Operations Manual (COMDTINST M3710.1H, October 2018).

All OPCs would also be flight deck-equipped with the ability to launch, recover, hangar, and maintain an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). Depending on available space, multiple UAS may be utilized. The OPC would have the capability to operate video-equipped UAS that would extend the visual capability of the OPC when conducting operations. The UAS would be deployed and recovered from the OPC. At this time, the specific type of UAS that would be deployed from the OPC is not known because the Coast Guard would acquire the most current UAS technology after the OPCs are operational. Coast Guard UAS Division sets policies and Standard Operating Procedures specific to UAS operations, including regulations that differ from those governing manned flight operations

Every 18-24 months, the OPC crew would undergo 3-4 weeks of training and evaluation, including over 100 drills and exercises in different scenarios ( e.g., flooding, combat, fires, refueling at sea, towing, active shooter) to demonstrate the crew's abilities to safely and effectively run the ship. During this training evaluation, a significant administrative portion is dedicated to ensure the ship's compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies. Some of the activities are integral to Coast Guard emergency response. Although emergency response is not a part of the Proposed Action, training is required. Therefore, training on an OPC for an emergency response is considered part of the Proposed Action. Training would entail practicing response to a simulated emergency while continuing the safe operation and navigation of the OPC.

Gunnery training may occur up to four times per year on each OPC vessel and would only occur in ranges authorized by the Coast Guard and when possible, in established Navy ranges, particularly when live ammunition is used. Areas with sensitive marine resources would not be used for gunnery training.

Vessel performance testing would occur up to annually and would typically occur near that vessel's homeport similar to testing currently conducted for MECs.

Coast Guard OPC operations and training would occur after delivery of each OPC from the shipbuilder to the Coast Guard. For example, OPC-1 delivery to the Coast Guard is expected in 2022 and would undergo approximately one year of training to become “Ready for Operations.” OPC-1 would then become operational in 2023. The last OPC ( i.e., OPC-25) is expected to be delivered in 2037 and would then become operational in 2038.

Under Alternative 2, Reduced Acquisition: The Coast Guard would explore the acquisition of fewer OPCs after the completion of OPC-1 through OPC-4 which are under contract. The Coast Guard would consider five, ten, or fifteen OPCs via a re-competition of the original OPC contract as replacements for a corresponding number of in-service MECs. The Coast Guard would then need to replace the remaining MECs on a one-for-one basis, using whatever replacement hulls the Coast Guard could obtain when deterioration or obsolescence requires decommissioning. The life cycle training and logistical costs of maintaining several unique hulls would exceed the corresponding costs of maintaining a class of 25 cutters that would be built specifically to conduct missions in the Coast Guard's AORs. Costs and challenges are similar to what is described under Alternative 3.

Under Alternative 3, Purchase, Lease, and Inherit: The Coast Guard would explore various forms of cutter purchase or lease, or inherit vessels from the U.S. Navy, as the need arises. This would mean that as a MEC reaches or surpasses the end of its economic service life, that cutter would not necessarily be replaced with the same type of asset or by an asset with similar capabilities. One-for-one MEC replacement would cost far more per replacement hull because it eliminates any workforce savings associated with a ship with capabilities designed specifically to conduct Coast Guard missions in areas that may exceed 50 nm (93 km) from shore.

Other drawbacks to the purchase, lease, and inherit alternative include the lack of an existing domestic commercial vessel capable of meeting available options to Purchase and Build‐to‐Lease.

One of the major challenges with this approach is that Coast Guard systems would not be properly integrated, limiting ability of assets to communicate in real time and resulting in decreased efficiency throughout the system, as well as higher maintenance costs.

No Action Alternative: The evaluation of a No Action Alternative is required by the regulations implementing NEPA. Under the No Action Alternative, the Coast Guard would acquire OPC-1 through OPC-4, then would fulfill its missions in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and Gulf of Mexico using existing assets, which are reaching the end of their service lives. The existing assets would continue to age, causing a decrease in efficiency of machinery as well as an increased risk of equipment failure or damage, and would not be considered reliable for immediate emergency response. In addition, it would become more difficult for an ageing fleet to remain in compliance with environmental laws and regulations and standards for safe operation. Further Service Life Extensions become more challenging as significant systems and parts are no longer available, which requires contracting for systems or parts to be made specifically for the vessel.

The No Action Alternative would also not meet the Coast Guard's statutory mission requirements in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and Gulf of Mexico by providing air, surface, and shore-side presence in those areas. The Coast Guard also enforces the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA), and without reliable Coast Guard presence, enforcement of these laws would be significantly reduced. As such, the No Action Alternative does not meet the purpose and need.

While the Coast Guard must work toward environmental compliance during the design and acquisition of OPCs, each vessel is not expected to impact the environment or biological resources until it is operational. In addition, vessel construction in commercial shipyards is not expected to impact any physical or biological resources.

Although the total number of OPCs may be subject to change, Congressional Authorization is for no more than 25. Therefore, the PEIS/POEIS analyzes the potential impact associated with the proposed acquisition and operation of up to 25 OPCs, as this would be the highest number projected to be operational in the Coast Guard's AORs. Acoustic and physical stressors associated with the Proposed Action may potentially impact the physical and biological environment in the AORs. Potential acoustic stressors include: Underwater transmissions (depth-sounder/navigation system), vessel noise, aircraft noise, and gunnery noise. OPCs would not feature SONAR, but would employ navigational systems. Potential physical stressors include: Vessel movement, aircraft movement (helicopters, UAS), and marine expended materials (MEM).

Since the OPC AORs cover a broad geographic area, stressors associated with the Proposed Action may potentially impact air quality, ambient sound, biological resources (including critical habitat), and socioeconomic resources. The PEIS/POEIS evaluates the likelihood that a resource would be exposed to or encounter a stressor and identifies the potential impact associated with that exposure or encounter. The likelihood of an exposure or encounter is based on the stressor, location, and timing relative to the spatial and temporal distribution each biological resource or critical habitat.

Under the Proposed Action, underwater acoustic transmissions, vessel noise, aircraft noise, gunnery noise, vessel movement, aircraft movement, and MEM associated with the Proposed Action is not expected to result in significant impacts to the following resources: Air quality, ambient sound, marine vegetation, marine invertebrates, flying insects, birds, bats, marine fish, Essential Fish Habitat, marine reptiles, marine mammals, commercial fishing, marine construction, mineral extraction, oil and gas extraction, recreation and tourism, renewable energy, research, transportation and shipping, and subsistence fishing and hunting. The Proposed Action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect any ESA-listed marine invertebrates, flying insects, birds, bats, fish, marine reptiles, and marine mammals.

There would be no effect to the critical habitat of black abalone, staghorn coral, and elkhorn coral. The Proposed Action is not expected to result in the destruction or adverse modification of federally-designated critical habitat for the piping plover, spectacled eider, Steller's eider, western snowy plover, bocaccio, eulachon, green sturgeon, Gulf sturgeon, smalltooth sawfish, yelloweye rockfish, green sea turtle, hawksbill sea turtle, leatherback sea turtle, loggerhead sea turtle, humpback whale, North Atlantic right whale, North Pacific right whale, false killer whale, Southern resident killer whale, Steller sea lion, Hawaiian monk seal, ringed seal, West Indian manatee, sea otter, and polar bear. Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703-712 et seq. ), the Proposed Action would not result in a significant adverse effect on migratory bird populations. Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA; 16 U.S.C. Sections 1801-1882), underwater acoustic transmissions, vessel noise, vessel movement, and MEM associated with the Proposed Action would not adversely affect the quality or quantity of EFH within the Coast Guard's AORs.

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA; 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq. ) was enacted to protect the coastal environment from demands associated with residential, recreational, and commercial uses. The Coast Guard would determine the impact of the Proposed Action and provide a Coastal Consistency Determination or Negative Determination to the appropriate state agency for anticipated concurrence once the homeports are selected for the OPCs.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) provides for the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems on which they depend. The Coast Guard anticipates consulting under Section 7 of the ESA with the services, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that have jurisdiction over the species (50 CFR part 402.14(a)).

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) established, with limited exceptions, a moratorium on the “taking” of marine mammals in waters or on lands under U.S. jurisdiction, and on the High Seas by vessels or persons under U.S. jurisdiction. The MMPA further regulates “takes” of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. citizens on the High Seas. The term “take,” as defined in Section 3 (16 U.S.C. 1362) of the MMPA, means “to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal”. “Harassment” was further defined in the 1994 amendments to the MMPA as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild ( i.e., Level A Harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering ( i.e., Level B Harassment). The Coast Guard anticipates requesting a Letter of Authorization to “take” marine mammals, defined as Level B harassment.

The first OPC is expected to be operational by 2023 with a projected construction completion date of all 25 OPCs by 2037. Because the first OPC would not be operational until at least 2023 and the last not until at least 2038, new information may become available after the completion of the PEIS/POEIS. In that case, supplemental NEPA/E.O. 12114 documentation may be prepared in support of new information or changes in the Proposed Action considered under the PEIS/POEIS. Some examples of new information that may be included in supplemental NEPA/E.O. 12114 documentation are substantial changes in the Proposed Action relevant to environmental concerns, significant new environmental changes or information bearing on the Proposed Action, or information that arises to further the purposes of NEPA/E.O. 12114. The PEIS/OEIS is expected to be completed within 24 months of the date from which this notice is published in the Federal Register .

The notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of a PEIS/POEIS. The Coast Guard is seeking comments on the potential environmental impacts that may result from the acquisition, testing (post-dockside), and operation of up to 25 OPCs, and any associated onboard training to help in the development of a PEIS/POEIS. The Coast Guard is also seeking input on relevant information, studies, or analyses of any kind concerning impacts potentially affecting the quality of the human environment as a result of the Proposed Action. NEPA requires federal agencies to consider environmental impacts that may result from a Proposed Action, to inform the public of potential impacts and alternatives, and to facilitate public involvement in the assessment process. E.O. 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions (44 Federal Register [FR] 1957), directs federal agencies to be informed of and take account of environmental considerations when making decisions regarding major federal actions outside of the U.S., its territories, and possessions. E.O. 12114 requires federal agencies to assess the effects of their actions outside the U.S. that may significantly harm the physical and natural environment. A PEIS/POEIS would include, among other topics, discussions of the purpose and need for the Proposed Action, a description of alternatives, a description of the affected environment, and an evaluation of the environmental impact of the Proposed Action and alternatives. The Coast Guard proposes to combine the PEIS and POEIS into one document, as permitted under NEPA and E.O. 12114, to reduce duplication.

The Coast Guard will evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives, and will analyze the No Action Alternative as a baseline for comparing the impacts of the Proposed Action. For the purposes of this Proposed Action, the No Action Alternative is defined as not approving the acquisition of OPC Stage 2 cutters (OPC cutters 5-25) and only replacing up to four of the current operational MECs using the four OPCs already under contract. Alternatives could include a reduction in the number of acquired vessels, upgrading the existing MEC fleet to further extend their useful life, and exploring various forms of cutter purchase or lease, or inheriting vessels from the U.S. Navy. The scoping period will begin upon publication of this notice in the Federal Register and continue for a period of forty-five (45) days.

The Coast Guard intends to follow the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing the NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500 et seq. ) by scoping through public comments. Scoping, which is integral to the process for implementing NEPA, provides a process to ensure that (1) issues are identified early and properly studied; (2) issues of little significance do not consume substantial time and effort; (3) the draft PEIS/POEIS is thorough and balanced; and (4) delays caused by an inadequate PEIS/POEIS are avoided.

Public scoping is a process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in this PEIS/POEIS and for identifying the issues related to the Proposed Action that may have a significant effect on the environment. The scoping process begins with publication of this notice and ends after the Coast Guard has:

• Invited the participation of Federal, State, and local agencies, any affected Indian tribe, and other interested persons;

• Consulted with affected Federally Recognized Tribes on a government-to-government basis, and with affected Alaska Native corporations, in accordance with E.O. 13175 and other policies. Native American concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential impacts to cultural resources, will be given appropriate consideration;

• Determined the scope and the issues to be analyzed in depth in the PEIS/POEIS;

• Indicated any related environmental assessments or environmental impact statements that are not part of the PEIS/POEIS;

• Identified other relevant environmental review and consultation requirements, such as Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determinations, and threatened and endangered species and habitat impacts; and

• Indicated the relationship between timing of the environmental review and other aspects of the application process.

With this Notice of Intent, we are asking federal, state, Tribal, and local agencies with jurisdiction or special expertise with respect to environmental issues in the project area to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the PEIS/POEIS.

Once the scoping process is complete, Coast Guard will prepare a draft PEIS/POEIS, and will publish a Federal Register notice announcing its public availability. We will provide the public with an opportunity to review and comment on the draft PEIS/POEIS. After Coast Guard considers those comments, we will prepare the final PEIS/POEIS and similarly announce its availability and solicit public review and comment. Comments received during the draft PEIS/POEIS review period will be available in the public docket and made available in the final PEIS/POEIS.

Pursuant to the CEQ regulations, Coast Guard invites public participation in the NEPA process. This notice requests public participation in the scoping process, establishes a public comment period, and provides information on how to participate.

The 45-day public scoping period begins November 18, 2020 and ends January 04, 2021. Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard and submitted to the online docket via https://www.regulations.gov/., or otherwise reach the OPC Program Manager on or before January 04, 2021.

We encourage you to submit specific, timely comments through the Federal portal at http://www.regulations.gov, on the site provided when searching on the above docket number or searching for Offshore Patrol Cutter. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the OPC program manager at HQS-SMB-OPC-EIS@uscg.mil. If you cannot submit comments electronically, written comments can be sent to: OPC Program Manager (CG-9322), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7800, Washington, DC 20593.

In your submission, please include the docket number for this notice of intent and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. Documents mentioned in this notice of intent as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's instructions.

Coast Guard does not plan to hold public meetings during the scoping period, however if sufficient requests for public comment are received, Coast Guard will consider holding public meetings and will announce the dates, times, and locations in a separate document published in the Federal Register . To receive an email notice whenever a comment or notice, including the notice announcing when any meetings are to be held, is submitted or issued, go to the online docket and select the sign-up-for-email-alerts option. When it is published, we will place a copy of the announcement in the docket, and you will receive an email alert from www.regulations.gov. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this Proposed Action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however.

CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Documentation Requirements for Articles Entered Under Various Special Tariff Treatment Provisions.

OMB Number: 1651-0067.

Current Actions: Extension.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Abstract: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is responsible for determining whether imported articles that are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 9801.00.10, 9802.00.20, 9802.00.40, 9802.00.50, 9802.00.60 and 9817.00.40 are entitled to duty-free or reduced duty treatment. In order to file under these HTSUS provisions, importers, or their agents, must have the declarations that are provided for in 19 CFR 10.1(a), 10.8(a), 10.9(a) and 10.121 in their possession at the time of entry and submit them to CBP upon request. These declarations enable CBP to ascertain whether the requirements of these HTSUS provisions have been satisfied.

These requirements apply to the trade community who are familiar with CBP regulations and the tariff schedules.

Type of Information Collection: Declarations under Chapter 98.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 19,445.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 3.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 58,335.

Estimated Time per Response: 1 minute (.016 hours).

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 933.

CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (85 FR 55469) on September 8, 2020, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Bonded Warehouse Regulations.

OMB Number: 1651-0041.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Abstract: Owners or lessees desiring to establish a bonded warehouse must make written application to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) port director of the port where the warehouse is located. The application must include the warehouse location, a description of the premises, and an indication of the class of bonded warehouse permit desired. Owners or lessees desiring to alter or to relocate a bonded warehouse may submit an application to the CBP port director of the port where the facility is located. The authority to establish and maintain a bonded warehouse is set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1555, and provided for by 19 CFR 19.2, 19 CFR 19.3, 19 CFR 19.6, 19 CFR 19.14, and 19 CFR 19.36.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 198.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 46.7.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 9,254.

Estimated Time per Response: 32 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,932.

The Board will meet virtually on Thursday, December 3, 2020. The meeting will be open to the public. Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.

The purpose of the Board is to review annually the programs of the National Fire Academy (Academy) and advise the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the United States Fire Administrator, on the operation of the Academy and any improvements therein that the Board deems appropriate. In carrying out its responsibilities, the Board examines Academy programs to determine whether these programs further the basic missions that are approved by the Administrator of FEMA, examines the physical plant of the Academy to determine the adequacy of the Academy's facilities, and examines the funding levels for Academy programs. The Board submits a written annual report through the United States Fire Administrator to the Administrator of FEMA. The report provides detailed comments and recommendations regarding the operation of the Academy.

On Thursday, December 3, 2020, there will be four sessions, with deliberations and voting at the end of each session as necessary:

1. The Board will discuss USFA Data, Research, Prevention, and Response.

2. The Board will discuss deferred maintenance and capital improvements on the National Emergency Training Center campus and Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request/Budget Planning.

3. The Board will deliberate and vote on recommendations on Academy program activities to include developments, deliveries, staffing, and admissions.

4. There will also be an update on the Board of Visitors Subcommittee Groups for the Professional Development Initiative Update and the National Fire Incident Report System.

There will be a 10-minute comment period after each agenda item and each speaker will be given no more than two minutes to speak. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated following the last call for comments. Contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp to register as a speaker. Meeting materials will be posted at https:// www.usfa.fema.gov/training/nfa/about/bov.html by November 20, 2020.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.

This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.

The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

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

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

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

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Consistent with the requirements of Executive Order (E.O.) 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, and E.O. 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, TSA is also requesting comments on the extent to which this request for information could be modified to reduce the burden on respondents.

OMB Control Number 1652-0053, Certified Cargo Screening Standard Security Program, 49 CFR Parts 1515, 1540, 1544, 1546, 1548, and 1549. Section 1602 of The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-53, 121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) (August 2007) (9/11 Act) required the development of a system to screen 100 percent of such cargo no later than August 2010. TSA currently requires 100 percent screening of all cargo transported on passenger aircraft. 1 The screening of air cargo must be in a manner approved by TSA and be commensurate with the level of security for the screening of passenger checked baggage. 2

TSA's regulations in 49 CFR part 1549 for the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP) support the 9/11 Act mandate by providing an alternative means of compliance with the 100% screening requirement. In order to comply with the statutory mandate, the CCSP allows shippers, indirect air carriers, and other entities to voluntarily participate in a program through which TSA certifies entities to screen air cargo off-airport before it is tendered to air carriers for transport on passenger aircraft. CCSFs may screen cargo off-airport and must implement measures to ensure a secure chain of custody from the point of screening to the point at which the cargo is tendered to the aircraft operator. The collection of information under the CCSP (see OMB number 1652-0053) are incorporated into this ICR.

As a signatory to the Convention on International Aviation, the United States has agreed to apply the standards contained in Annex 17 as promulgated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Amendment 14 of Annex 17 removed the distinction between passenger and cargo operations and now requires that all cargo be subject to security controls, including screening where practicable, on all commercial air transport operations. 3 ICAO has provided until June 30, 2021 for member states to implement the above standard. When considering the current requirement to screen 100% of air cargo transported on passenger and all cargo aircraft, TSA expects that there will be an increase in demand for more options to mitigate the cost of screening cargo as the United States begins to build up and implement security controls to meet the June 30, 2021 deadline to implement Annex 17, Standard 4.6.1.

In the Spring 2020, OMB approved TSA's request to revise the ICR in response to changing conditions in the air cargo industry. Consistent with the need to expand screening capabilities to meet the ICAO standards that take effect in 2021, the TSA Modernization Act required TSA to develop a program for TSA to certify 3PK9-C Teams to screen air cargo. 4 TSA incorporated this capability under the framework of the CCSP, providing an opportunity for canine team providers to choose to be regulated as CCSFs under 49 CFR part 1549 and approved to use Certified 3PK9-C Teams to screen cargo for TSA regulated entities.

All CCSFs are required to allow TSA to assess whether a person or entity meets the standards of the applicable security program requirements. A CCSF-K9 is an inherently mobile capability that can screen cargo at the facility owned and operated by one of TSA's regulated entities. As holders of a TSA-approved security program issued pursuant to 49 CFR part 1549, canine providers participating in this program can contract with air carriers and standard CCSFs to screen air cargo, on or off airport, with canine explosives detection teams certified as meeting TSA's standards. The 3PK9-C program approves third-party (non-governmental) certifiers, operating under the 3PK9-C Certifier Order, to evaluate canine teams to determine whether these teams meet the TSA certification standards.

Recognizing non-governmental entities to evaluate 3PK9-C Teams to determine whether these teams meet TSA's standards for the certification of explosives detection canine teams approved to screen air cargo serves two purposes. First, it ensures effective security. TSA must have confidence that the screening conducted by Certified 3PK9-C Teams will protect air cargo by identifying unauthorized explosives, incendiaries, and other destructive substances and protect the air cargo from the introduction of these destructive substances from the time the cargo is screened until it is accepted by an aircraft operator or a foreign air carrier for transport. To provide this confidence, TSA established uniform processes and standards for approval of 3PK9-C Certifiers, including qualification of personnel who will evaluate canine teams and consistent application of TSA's criteria for canine teams seeking certification or recertification as a Certified 3PK9-C Team. Second, the use of third-party certifiers allows for market-driven expansion of the program. As required by section 1941 of the TSA Modernization Act, no federal funds can be expended for the training or certification of canine teams operating under this program. As with the CCSF-K9s, qualified persons may apply to become a 3PK9-C Certifier. If approved, the 3PK9-C Certifier agrees to comply with an Order issued by TSA under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 46105.

There are three primary programs issued under 49 CFR part 1549 that ensure compliance with TSA's requirements by persons choosing to participate in the program: (1) The Certified Cargo Screening Security Program, applicable to facilities-based CCSFs; (2) the Certified Cargo Security Program-Canine, applicable to canine team providers; and (3) the 3PK9-C Certifier Order, applicable to third-party certifiers. The collections of information under the CCSP are incorporated into this ICR. The following are required to maintain participation under the programs available under the CCSP:

TSA estimates the annual respondents for CCSF, CCSP-K9, and 3PK9-C Certifier to be 2,527 and the total annual hour burden to be 16,189.98 hours.

The Service received applications from the Rayonier Operating Company, LLC (Rayonier), and the Sierra Pacific Land & Timber Company Operating Company (Sierra Pacific) (jointly, the applicants) for enhancement of survival permits (permits) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ). The applications each request a permit that would authorize “take” of the threatened marbled murrelet associated with forest management actions on private lands, with implementation of a Safe Harbor Agreement (SHA). The SHAs describe actions the applicants will take to achieve a net conservation benefit for the covered species on the applicants' lands. The Service also announces the availability of two draft environmental assessments (EAs) addressing the effects of the proposed permits and SHAs on the human environment in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ). We invite comments from all interested parties regarding the permit applications, including the SHAs and draft EAs.

Section 9 of the ESA prohibits “take” of fish and wildlife species listed as endangered (16 U.S.C. 1538(a)(1)). Section 4 of the ESA allows FWS to issue regulations which prohibit the take of any fish and wildlife species listed as threatened, as well (16 U.S.C. 1533(d)). The take prohibition has been extended to the marbled murrelet. Under the ESA, the term “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)). The term “harm,” as defined in our regulations, includes significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). The term “harass” is defined in our regulations as an intentional or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury to listed species by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns, which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). Incidental take is defined as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity (50 CFR 17.3).

Under an SHA, participating landowners undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat conditions for species listed under the ESA to an extent that is likely to result in a net conservation benefit for the covered listed species. An SHA, and the associated enhancement of survival permit issued to participating landowners, encourages private and other non-Federal property owners to implement conservation actions for federally listed species by assuring the participating landowners that they will not be subject to increased property use restrictions as a result of their efforts to either attract listed species to their property, or to increase the numbers or distribution of listed species already on their property.

An SHA and its associated permit allow the property owner to alter or modify the enrolled property back to agreed-upon pre-permit baseline conditions at the end of the term of the permit, even if such alteration or modification results in the incidental take of a listed species. The baseline conditions must reflect the known biological and habitat characteristics that support existing levels of use of the enrolled property by the species covered in the SHA. The authorization to take listed species is contingent on the property owner complying with obligations in the SHA and the terms and conditions of the permit. The SHA's net conservation benefits must be sufficient to contribute, either directly or indirectly, to the recovery of the covered listed species. Enrolled landowners may make lawful use of the enrolled property during the term of the permit and may incidentally take the listed species named on the permit in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit.

Permit application requirements and issuance criteria for enhancement of survival permits for SHAs that involve species listed as threatened, such as the marbled murrelet, are found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17.32(c). The Service's Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717, June 17, 1999) and the Safe Harbor Regulations (68 FR 53320, September 10, 2003; and 69 FR 24084, May 3, 2004) are available at http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/regulations-and-policies.html.

The applicants have both developed SHAs in support of their applications for enhancement of survival permits, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. Rayonier's proposed SHA is for forest management activities on over 212,400 acres of privately owned lands located in eleven counties in western Washington. Sierra Pacific's proposed SHA is for forest management activities on over 184,300 acres of privately owned lands located in six counties in western Washington. The Service's proposed actions are issuance of the requested permits and implementation of the SHAs.

The requested permits would allow the applicants to maintain or increase potential nesting habitat for the threatened marbled murrelet on their lands, while providing incidental take authorization for marbled murrelets associated with timber harvesting and other forest management activities when conducted on the covered lands. Under the proposed SHAs, the applicants will continue to manage their forest lands for timber production in compliance with the Washington Forest Practices Rules, which include provisions for the protection of forested buffers along rivers, streams, wetlands, and unstable slopes. Under the SHAs, the applicants will continue to protect all previously-documented occupied marbled murrelet habitat on their lands. Additionally, each applicant will defer harvest in certain other areas identified as potential marbled murrelet nesting habitat on their lands for the term of their respective SHA. By volunteering to defer timber harvest in certain areas, the proposed SHAs protect more forest habitat on their lands than would otherwise be protected under existing forest practices rules. The term of the permits would extend to 2056, to coincide with the term of the 2006 Washington Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan, which provides take coverage for other ESA-listed salmon and other aquatic species.

The proposed issuance of a permit is a Federal action that triggers the need for compliance with NEPA. Pursuant to the requirements of NEPA, we have prepared two draft EAs to analyze the environmental impacts of a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Federal permit actions. As the EAs were developed prior to the Council on Environmental Quality's issuance of updated regulations implementing NEPA, which went into effect on September 14, 2020 (40 CFR 1506.13), they were developed under the previous regulations in the interest of time and efficiency.

The EAs analyze similar alternatives, and each includes a no-action alternative, the proposed action, and an additional action alternative. For each EA, the proposed action is implementation of the SHA and issuance of the requested permit, as described above and in more detail in the individual SHAs. Each EA also analyses a no-action alternative, where the proposed Federal action of issuing the permit would not proceed, and one additional alternative analyzing a variation on the type and amount of habitat being considered to meet the net conservation benefit standard.

You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We specifically request information, views, and opinions from interested parties regarding our proposed Federal actions, including on the adequacy of the SHAs pursuant to the requirements for permits at 50 CFR parts 13 and 17 and the adequacy of the draft EAs pursuant to the requirements of NEPA.

All comments and materials we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information in your comments, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifiable information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personally identifiable information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.

After public review and completion of the EAs, we will determine whether the proposed actions warrant findings of no significant impact or whether environmental impact statements should be prepared. We will evaluate the permit applications, associated documents, and any comments received, to determine whether each permit application meets the requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. We will also evaluate whether issuance of the requested permits would comply with section 7(a)(2) of the ESA by conducting separate intra-Service consultations on each proposed permit action. The final NEPA and permit determinations will not be completed until after the end of the 30-day comment period and will fully consider all comments received during the comment period. If we determine that all requirements are met, we intend to issue enhancement of survival permits under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA.

We provide this notice in accordance with the requirements of section 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) and NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and their implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.32 and 40 CFR 1506.6, respectively).

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the USGS; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the USGS enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the USGS minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

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

Abstract: The USGS National Land Imaging (NLI) Program is currently planning for the next generation of Landsat satellites. These satellites will continue the multi-decadal continuous collection of moderate-resolution, multispectral, remotely-sensed imagery through the Landsat program. Landsat satellite imagery has been available at no cost to the public since 2008, which has resulted in the distribution of millions of scenes each subsequent year, as well tens of thousands of Landsat users registering with USGS to access the data. In order to continue to provide high quality imagery that meets the needs of users, NLI is collecting current and future user requirements for sensor and satellite attributes. These attributes include spatial resolution, spectral bands, frequency of acquisition, and many others. NLI will use the information from this collection to understand if they are currently meeting the needs of their user community and to help determine the features of future Landsat satellites. Questions will be asked to determine user characteristics, current uses of imagery, preferred attributes of Landsat imagery, and benefits of Landsat imagery. Previous surveys were provided to all U.S. Landsat imagery users who were registered with USGS and a large sample of international Landsat users were also invited. However, many changes have occurred, and many Landsat users are not registered with USGS, but instead access Landsat imagery through a variety of cloud servers. The current and future user requirements for sensor and satellite attributes information from this user group has not been collected and is essential for future satellite decision-making within the NLI program. All Landsat users who participate during Earth observation capacity-building workshops will be invited to take part in the survey.

To protect the confidentiality and privacy of survey respondents, the data from the survey will not be associated with any respondent's email address at any time and will only be analyzed and reported in aggregate. All files containing PII will be password-protected, housed on secure USGS servers, and only accessible to the research team. The data from the survey will be aggregated and statistically analyzed and the results will be published in publicly available USGS reports.

Title of Collection: Current and Future Landsat User Requirements.

OMB Control Number: 1028-0123.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Renewal of a previously approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: General public.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 11,660.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 11,660.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 20 minutes on average. We estimate that it will take 20 minutes per person to complete the full survey and 5 minutes per person to complete the non-response survey.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 3,335.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Frequency of Collection: One time.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: There are no “non-hour cost” burdens associated with this collection of information.

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

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

The SMAC was established August 14, 2001, pursuant to the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act of 2000 (Steens Act) (Pub. L. 106-399). The SMAC provides recommendations to the BLM regarding new and unique approaches to management of the land within the bounds of the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (CMPA); recommends cooperative programs and incentives for landscape management that meet human needs; and advises the BLM on potential maintenance and improvement of the ecological and economic integrity of the area.

The SMAC's Public Lands Access Subcommittee was established in 2015 and serves to research, discuss, and evaluate any public access issue in the Steens Mountain CMPA. Issues may relate to parking, hiking, motorized or non-motorized use, public to private land inholding routes and methods of travel, private to public land access by way of easement or other agreement, or purchase or exchange of public and private land for improved access and contiguous landscape. The Subcommittee reviews all aspects of any access issue, formulates suggestions for remedy, and proposes those solutions to the entire SMAC for further discussion and possible recommendation to the BLM.

The December 16 agenda includes an update from the Designated Federal Officer; discussion on the SMAC's definition of “reasonable access”; an update on the Nature's Advocate Inholder Access Environmental Assessment (EA); a discussion on the Pike Creek Parking Area EA; information sharing about Travel Management Planning for the Steens Mountain area; and an opportunity for Subcommittee members to share information from their constituents and present research. Any other matters that may reasonably come before the Subcommittee may also be included.

A public comment period is available at 2:30 p.m. Depending on the number of people wishing to comment and the time available, the amount of time for oral comments may be limited. Sessions may end early if all business items are accomplished ahead of schedule, or may be extended if discussions warrant more time. All meetings, including this Zoom videoconference, are open to the public in their entirety.

Public Disclosure of Comments: Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, please 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.

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 November 7, 2020. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:

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

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Abundant Freedom LLC on November 10, 2020. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain sponge or foam products. The complaint names as respondents: Guangzhou Rantion Technology Co., Ltd. of China; Song Deqi of China; Ya'nam Lin of China; and Yiwu Thousand Shores E-Commerce Co. Ltd. of China. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a general exclusion order, cease and desist orders and impose a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3506”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures  1 ). 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. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By 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  2 , solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2020).

Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on November 12, 2020, Ordered that—

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-3 of the '528 patent and the claim of the '504 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;

(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “handheld electric head and body shavers and their components and accessories”;

(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:

(a) The complainant is:

(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:

(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and

(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.

Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), as amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the complainant of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.

Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.

The Commission instituted this investigation on September 8, 2020, based on a complaint filed on behalf of Regal Beloit America, Inc (“Regal”) of Beloit, Wisconsin. 85 FR 55491-92 (Sep. 8, 2020). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain blowers and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 7-10, and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 8,079,834. Id. at 55492. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. at 55491. The Commission's notice of investigation named as respondents: East West Manufacturing, LLC of Atlanta, Georgia and East West Industries of Binh Duong, Vietnam. Id. at 55492. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations did not participate as a party. Id.

On October 14, 2020, Respondents filed a motion to terminate the investigation with respect to themselves based upon a consent order stipulation. The motion included a consent order stipulation and a proposed consent order.

On October 22, 2020, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting the motion and terminating the investigation with respect to Respondents based on the entry of a consent order. Order No. 6 at 3 (Oct. 22, 2020). The ID found that the consent order stipulation and proposed consent order complied with Commission Rule 210.21(c)(3) and (4) (19 CFR 210.21(c)(3) and (4)). Id. at 1-3. The ID also found that termination of the investigation with respect to Respondents would not be contrary to the public interest. Id. at 3. No petitions for review of the ID were received.

The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID and to issue a consent order. Respondents are hereby terminated from the investigation. The investigation is terminated in its entirety.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 12, 2020.

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.

Scope. —For purposes of these investigations, Commerce has defined the subject merchandise as “common alloy aluminum sheet, which is a flat-rolled aluminum product having a thickness of 6.3 mm or less, but greater than 0.2 mm, in coils or cut-to-length, regardless of width. Common alloy sheet within the scope {of these investigations} includes both not clad aluminum sheet, as well as multi-alloy, clad aluminum sheet. With respect to not clad aluminum sheet, common alloy sheet is manufactured from a 1XXX-, 3XXX-, or 5XXX-series alloy as designated by the Aluminum Association. With respect to multi-alloy, clad aluminum sheet, common alloy sheet is produced from a 3XXX-series core, to which cladding layers are applied to either one or both sides of the core. The use of a proprietary alloy or non-proprietary alloy that is not specifically registered by the Aluminum Association as a discrete 1XXX-, 3XXX-, or 5XXX-series alloy, but that otherwise has a chemistry that is consistent with these designations, does not remove an otherwise in-scope product from the scope . . . Excluded from the scope {of these investigations} is aluminum can stock, which is suitable for use in the manufacture of aluminum beverage cans, lids of such cans, or tabs used to open such cans.” For Commerce's complete scope and tariff treatment, see 85 FR 65372, October 15, 2020.

Background. —The final phase of these investigations is being scheduled pursuant to sections 705(b) and 731(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 1673d(b)), as a result of affirmative preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of common alloy aluminum sheet from Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Italy, Korea, Oman, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, and Turkey are being sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of § 733 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b) and that certain benefits which constitute subsidies within the meaning of § 703 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b) are being provided to manufacturers, producers, or exporters in Bahrain, Brazil, India, and Turkey. The investigations were requested in petitions filed on March 9, 2020, by The Aluminum Association Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet Working Group and its Individual Members, Aleris Rolled Products, Inc., Beachwood, Ohio; Arconic, Inc., Bettendorf, Iowa; Constellium Rolled Products Ravenswood, LLC, Ravenswood, West Virginia; JW Aluminum Company, Daniel Island, South Carolina; Novelis Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia; and Texarkana Aluminum, Inc., Texarkana, Texas.

For further information concerning the conduct of this phase of the investigations, 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 207, subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207).

Participation in the investigations and public service list. —Persons, including industrial users of the subject merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the final phase of these investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in § 201.11 of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. A party that filed a notice of appearance during the preliminary phase of the investigations need not file an additional notice of appearance during this final phase. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations.

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.

Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list. —Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in the final phase of these investigations available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined by 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the investigations. A party granted access to BPI in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not reapply for such access. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

Staff report. —The prehearing staff report in the final phase of these investigations will be placed in the nonpublic record on February 11, 2021, and a public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to § 207.22 of the Commission's rules.

Hearing. —The Commission will hold a hearing in connection with the final phase of these investigations beginning at 9:30 a.m. on March 2, 2021. Information about the place and form of the hearing, including about how to participate in and/or view the hearing, will be posted on the Commission's website at https://www.usitc.gov/calendarpad/calendar.html. Interested parties should check the Commission's website periodically for updates. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission on or before February 22, 2021. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the hearing. All parties and nonparties desiring to appear at the hearing and make oral presentations should participate in a prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 a.m. on March 1, 2021. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the public hearing are governed by sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 207.24 of the Commission's rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony in camera no later than 7 business days prior to the date of the hearing.

Written submissions. —Each party who is an interested party shall submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. Prehearing briefs must conform with the provisions of § 207.23 of the Commission's rules; the deadline for filing is February 19, 2021. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in § 207.24 of the Commission's rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of § 207.25 of the Commission's rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is March 9, 2021. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the investigations may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the investigations, including statements of support or opposition to the petition, on or before March 9, 2021. On March 24, 2021, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before March 26, 2021, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with § 207.30 of the Commission's rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of § 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on Filing Procedures, available on the Commission's website at https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's procedures with respect to filings.

Additional written submissions to the Commission, including requests pursuant to § 201.12 of the Commission's rules, shall 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 §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.

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:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: New collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: FOIAXpress Public Access Link.

3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: No agency form, electronic collection. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Office of the General Counsel, Executive Office for Immigration Review.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Members of the public seeking to obtain records from the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). Abstract: This information collection is necessary to communicate with the requester community regarding agency record requests and deliver agency records subject to disclosure to the requester community.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 33,984 respondents will complete FOIA requests via FOIAXpress with an average of 3 minutes per response.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 1,699 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

I. Background

The Secretary of Labor has delegated to the BLS the authority to collect, compile, and analyze statistical data on work-related injuries and illnesses, as authorized by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Pub. L. 91-596). The Cooperative Agreement is designed to allow the BLS to ensure conformance with program objectives. The BLS has full authority over the financial operations of the statistical program. The existing collection of information allows Federal staff to negotiate the Cooperative Agreement with the State Grant Agencies and monitor their financial and programmatic performance and adherence to administrative requirements imposed by the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 CFR 200) and other grant related regulations. The information collected also is used for planning and budgeting at the Federal level and in meeting Federal reporting requirements. The BLS requires financial reporting that will produce the information that is needed to monitor the financial activities of the BLS Occupational Safety and Health Statistics grantees.

The Cooperative Agreement application package being submitted for approval is representative of the package sent every year to state agencies. The work statements included in the Cooperative Agreement application also are representative of what is included in the whole OSHS Cooperative Agreement package. The final Cooperative Agreement, including the work statements, will be submitted separately to the Office of Management and Budget for review of any minor year-to-year information collection burden changes they may contain.

Office of Management and Budget clearance is being sought for the OSHS Cooperative Agreement application package.

The BLS is particularly interested in comments that:

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

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

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

Title of Collection: BLS Occupational Safety and Health Statistics (OSHS) Cooperative Agreement Application Package.

OMB Number: 1220-0149.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Governments.