Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organizations they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference call. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Mallory Trachtenberg at mtrachtenberg@usccr.gov in the Regional Programs Unit Office/Advisory Committee Management Unit. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Program Unit at 202-809-9618.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicCommittee?id=a10t0000001gzmAAAQ under the Commission on Civil Rights, New York Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or phone number.

Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll-free number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind, or hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski at mwojnaroski@usccr.gov in the Regional Program Unit Office/Advisory Committee Management Unit. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at 202-618-4158.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Georgia Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or phone number.

Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll-free number or online through the above registration link. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind, or hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski at mwojnaroski@usccr.gov in the Regional Program Unit Office/Advisory Committee Management Unit. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at 202-618-4158.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/FACAPublicViewCommitteeDetails?id=a10t0000001gzjPAAQ under the Commission on Civil Rights, Michigan Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or phone number.

On April 13, 2020, KG Dongbu Steel informed Commerce that effective September 1, 2019, KG Steel Co., Ltd. (KG Steel) purchased a substantial portion of Dongbu Steel's shares and, as a result, became the major shareholder of Dongbu Steel. 1 On March 2, 2020, Dongbu Steel publicly announced its merger with its wholly-owned subsidiary Dongbu Incheon after Dongbu Steel's Board of Directors had approved the merger. 2 Further, on March 27, 2020, Dongbu Steel received shareholder approval for the newly-merged Dongbu Steel to change its name to KG Dongbu Steel. 3 As such, KG Dongbu Steel requested that Commerce conduct changed circumstances reviews (CCRs) and find that KG Dongbu Steel is the successor in interest to Dongbu Steel and Dongbu Incheon, and that it be subject to cash deposit requirements at the AD margins and CVD rates currently in effect for entries of cold-rolled steel and CORE by Dongbu Steel and Dongbu Incheon, pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216(b). We did not receive comments from other interested parties concerning these requests.

On June 4, 2020, Commerce initiated the CCRs of the AD and CVD orders on cold-rolled steel and CORE from Korea. On June 12, 2020, Commerce requested more information from KG Dongbu Steel regarding the “look-back window” for purposes of the CVD CCRs, 4 and on June 30, 2020, KG Dongbu Steel filed its response. 5 For a complete description of the successor-in-interest analysis, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 6 A list of topics addressed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

The products covered by these CCRs are certain cold-rolled steel products (cold-rolled steel) and certain corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from Korea. For full descriptions of the scope of the orders, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.216, we preliminarily determine that KG Dongbu Steel is the successor in interest to Dongbu Steel and Dongbu Incheon for purposes of the AD orders on cold-rolled steel and CORE. Record evidence, as submitted by KG Dongbu Steel, indicates that, based on the totality of the circumstances under Commerce's successor-in-interest criteria, KG Dongbu Steel's operations are not materially dissimilar to those of Dongbu Steel and Dongbu Incheon before the acquisition and name change with respect to the merchandise under review, for purposes of the AD CCRs. Moreover, we preliminarily find that KG Dongbu Steel's production facilities, supplier relationships, and customer base with regard to the merchandise subject to the AD orders are substantially the same as Dongbu Steel's and Dongbu Incheon's before the acquisition and name change.

However, with respect to the CVD CCRs, we preliminarily find that there is evidence of significant changes in ownership during the “look-back window” that could have affected the nature and extent of the countervailable subsidies attributable to the successor entity vs. the predecessor entity. These changes in management and ownership would likely have affected subsidization of the companies. An examination of the actual amount and rate of countervailable subsidies attributable to KG Dongbu Steel subsidy, therefore, would be more appropriate in the context of an administrative review.

Therefore, based on record evidence, we preliminarily determine that it is appropriate to apply to KG Dongbu Steel AD cash deposits requirements and liabilities at the rates currently in effect for Dongbu Steel/Dongbu Incheon. For CVD purposes, we preliminarily determine that changes in ownership and management were significant, and thus preliminarily determine that it is not appropriate to apply to KG Dongbu Steel the CVD cash deposit requirements and liabilities currently in effect for Dongbu Steel/Dongbu Incheon. For additional details regarding the preliminary successor-in-interest analysis, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Interested parties will be notified of the timeline for the submission of such case briefs and written comments at a later date. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than seven days after the deadline date for case briefs. 7 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 8 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, whether any participant is a foreign national, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date and time of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

Consistent with 19 CFR 351.216(e), we will intend to issue the final results of this changed circumstances review no later than 270 days after the date on which this review was initiated, or within 45 days if all parties agree to our preliminary finding.

This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(b), 351.221(b) and 351.221(c)(3).

Every five years, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct reviews to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury.

Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, the following Sunset Reviews are scheduled for initiation in February 2021 and will appear in that month's Notice of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews (Sunset Review).

No Sunset Review of suspended investigations is scheduled for initiation in February 2021.

Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Review are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Review provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Review.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), Commerce will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact Commerce in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.

Please note that if Commerce receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue.

Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation. Note that Commerce has modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 1

This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.

On December 1, 2020, Commerce published the Final Results of the 2017-2018 administrative review of CWP from the UAE in the Federal Register . 1 On November 30, 2020, Universal Tube and Plastic Industries, Ltd., KHK Scaffolding and Framework LLC, and THL Pipe and Tube Industries LLC (collectively, Universal), one of two companies selected for individual examination in this administrative review, alleged the existence of a ministerial error in Commerce's Final Results. 2

A ministerial error, as defined in section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), includes “errors in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical errors resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type of unintentional error which the administering authority considers ministerial.”  3 With respect to final results of administrative reviews, 19 CFR 351.224(e) provides that Commerce “will analyze any comments received and, if appropriate, correct any ministerial error by amending . . . the final results of review.”

Commerce committed an inadvertent error within the meaning of section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f) by incorrectly calculating Universal's home market commissions. Accordingly, we determine, in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f), that we made a ministerial error in the Final Results. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), we are amending the Final Results to correct this error. This correction results in a change to Universal's weighted-average dumping margin and also changes the rate calculated for the non-individually-examined companies. For a detailed discussion of the ministerial error allegation, as well as Commerce's analysis, see Ministerial Error Memorandum. 4

Subsequent to the publication of the notice in the Federal Register , we identified an inadvertent error in the Final Results in addition to the one alleged by Universal. Specifically, Commerce inadvertently referenced the review-specific rate of 3.14 percent as the all-others rate in the cash deposit section of the notice. However, the all-others rate, established in the investigation, is 5.95 percent. 5 The corrected cash deposit section of the notice is below.

We are assigning the following weighted-average dumping margins to the firms listed below for the period December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018:

We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these amended final results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the amended final results of this review.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because Conares Metal Supply Ltd and Universal reported the entered value of their U.S. sales, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. Where an importer-specific rate is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we will assign an assessment rate based on the average  8 of the cash deposit rates calculated for Conares Metal Supply Ltd and Universal. The amended final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the amended final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 9

Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know that the merchandise they sold to the intermediary ( e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

We intend to issue liquidation instructions for Universal and the companies covered by the non-reviewed companies' rate to CBP 15 days after publication of these amended final results of this administrative review.

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after December 1, 2020, the date of publication date of the Final Results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for each specific company listed above will be that established in the amended final results; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies, including those for which Commerce may have determined had no shipments during the POR, the cash deposit will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this or an earlier review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previously completed segment of this proceeding, then the cash deposit rate will be the all-others rate of 5.95 percent established in the LTFV investigation. 10 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

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

This amended notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(h) and 777(i) of the Act.

Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), may request, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213, that the Department of Commerce (Commerce) conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation.

All deadlines for the submission of comments or actions by Commerce discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting date.

In the event Commerce limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the period of review. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties having an APO within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 21 days of publication of the initiation Federal Register notice. Therefore, we encourage all parties interested in commenting on respondent selection to submit their APO applications on the date of publication of the initiation notice, or as soon thereafter as possible. Commerce invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within five days of placement of the CBP data on the record of the review.

In the event Commerce decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:

In general, Commerce finds that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” ( i.e., treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, Commerce will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of a review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding ( i.e., investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to a review, if Commerce determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, Commerce will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, Commerce will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete a Quantity and Value Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of a proceeding where Commerce considered collapsing that entity, complete quantity and value data for that collapsed entity must be submitted.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that requests a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that Commerce may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. Determinations by Commerce to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.

Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of constructed value under section 773(e) of the Act. 1 Section 773(e) of the Act states that “if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.” When an interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify its dumping calculations appropriately.

Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of initial Section D responses.

Opportunity To Request a Review: Not later than the last day of January 2021, 2 interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in January for the following periods:

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review. In addition, a domestic interested party or an interested party described in section 771(9)(B) of the Act must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which was produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover.

Note that, for any party Commerce was unable to locate in prior segments, Commerce will not accept a request for an administrative review of that party absent new information as to the party's location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or exporter at the same time it files its request for review, in order for the Secretary to determine if the interested party's attempts were reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii).

As explained in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), and Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011), Commerce clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders. 3

Commerce no longer considers the non-market economy (NME) entity as an exporter conditionally subject to an antidumping duty administrative reviews. 4 Accordingly, the NME entity will not be under review unless Commerce specifically receives a request for, or self-initiates, a review of the NME entity. 5 In administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders on merchandise from NME countries where a review of the NME entity has not been initiated, but where an individual exporter for which a review was initiated does not qualify for a separate rate, Commerce will issue a final decision indicating that the company in question is part of the NME entity. However, in that situation, because no review of the NME entity was conducted, the NME entity's entries were not subject to the review and the rate for the NME entity is not subject to change as a result of that review (although the rate for the individual exporter may change as a function of the finding that the exporter is part of the NME entity). Following initiation of an antidumping administrative review when there is no review requested of the NME entity, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate entries for all exporters not named in the initiation notice, including those that were suspended at the NME entity rate.

All requests must be filed electronically in Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS) on Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS website at https://access.trade.gov. 6 Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(l)(i), a copy of each request must be served on the petitioner and each exporter or producer specified in the request. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 7

Commerce will publish in the Federal Register a notice of “Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation” for requests received by the last day of January 2021. If Commerce does not receive, by the last day of January 2021, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, Commerce will instruct CBP to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered.

For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review.

This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.

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

Title of Collection: Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) Regulatory Requirements.

OMB Control Number: 1880-0543.

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

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

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 20,293,021.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,914,593.

Abstract: The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) requires that subject educational agencies and institutions notify parents and students of their rights under FERPA and requires that they record disclosures of personally identifiable information from education records, with certain exceptions.

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 online virtual meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting as there will not be opportunities for live public comment during this online virtual meeting. 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 submit public comments should email them as directed above.

Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Barbara Ulmer, NSSAB Administrator, U.S. Department of Energy, EM Nevada Program, 100 North City Parkway, Suite 1750, Las Vegas, NV 89106; Phone: (702) 523-0894. Minutes will also be available at the following website: http://www.nnss.gov/NSSAB/pages/MM_FY21.html.

On October 26, 2020, the Commission published a notice in the Federal Register inviting public comments for 60 days on this information collection (85 FR 67732). The public comment period expired on December 28, 2020. The Commission received no public comments in response. As described above, the Commission now invites public comments for a period of 30 days.

Title: FERC-549B (Gas Pipeline Rates: Capacity Reports and Index of Customers).

OMB Control No.: 1902-0169.

Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-549B information collection requirements with no program changes.

Abstract: The requirements of FERC-549B consist of an Index of Customers (IOC) report and two capacity reports. This information collection is authorized by 15 U.S.C. 717, 717c, and 717d, and by 18 CFR 284.13.

On April 4, 1992, in Order No. 636 (RM91-11-000), the Commission established a capacity release mechanism under which shippers could release firm transportation and storage capacity on either a short- or long-term basis to other shippers wanting to obtain capacity. Pipelines posted available firm and interruptible capacity information on their electronic bulletin boards (EBBs) to inform potential shippers.

On August 3, 1992, in Order No. 636-A (RM91-11-002), the Commission determined through staff audits, that the efficiency of the capacity release mechanism could be enhanced by standardizing the content and format of capacity release information and the methods by which shippers accessed this information, which pipelines posted to their EBBs.

On March 29, 1995, through Order 577 (RM95-5-000), the Commission amended § 284.243(h) of its regulations to allow shippers the ability to release capacity without having to comply with the Commission's advance posting and bidding requirements.

On February 9, 2000, in Order No. 637 (RM98-10-000), to create greater substitution between different forms of capacity and to enhance competition across the pipeline grid, the Commission revised its capacity release regulations regarding scheduling, segmentation and flexible point rights, penalties, and reporting requirements. This resulted in more reliable capacity information availability and price data that shippers needed to make informed decisions in a competitive market as well as to improve shipper's and the Commission's ability to monitor the market for potential abuses.

The regulation at 18 CFR 284.13(d)(2) requires an annual peak day capacity report of all interstate pipelines, including natural gas storage only companies. This report is generally a short report showing the peak day design capacity or the actual peak day capacity achieved, with a short explanation, if needed. The regulation provides that an interstate pipeline must make an annual filing by March 1 of each year showing the estimated peak day capacity of the pipeline's system, and the estimated storage capacity and maximum daily delivery capability of storage facilities under reasonably representative operating assumptions and the respective assignments of that capacity to the various firm services provided by the pipeline.

This annual report is publicly available, while other more specific interstate pipeline and storage capacity details are filed as Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, such as the Annual System Flow Diagram (FERC-567), which is not publicly available.

In Order 581, issued September 28, 1995 (Docket No. RM95-4-000), the Commission established the IOC quarterly information requirement. This order required the reporting of five data elements in the IOC filing: The customer name, the rate schedule under which service is rendered, the contract effective date, the contract termination date, and the maximum daily contract quantity, for either transportation or storage service, as appropriate.

In a notice issued separately from Order 581 in Docket No. RM95-4-000, issued February 29, 1996, the Commission, through technical conferences with industry, determined that the IOC data reported should be in tab delimited format on diskette and in a format prescribed in Appendix A of the rulemaking. In a departure from past practice, a three-digit code, instead of a six-digit code, was established to identify the respondent.

In Order 637, issued February 9, 2000 (Docket Nos. RM98-10-000 and RM98-12-000), the Commission required the filing of: The receipt and delivery points held under contract and the zones or segments in which the capacity is held, the common transaction point codes, the contract number, the shipper identification number, an indication of whether the contract includes negotiated rates, the names of any agents or asset managers that control capacity in a pipeline rate zone, and any affiliate relationship between the pipeline and the holder of capacity. It was stated in the order that the changes to the Commission's reporting requirements would enhance the reliability of information about capacity availability and price that shippers need to make informed decisions in a competitive market as well as improve shippers' and the Commission's ability to monitor marketplace behavior to detect and remedy anti-competitive behavior. Order 637 required a pipeline to post the IOC data quarterly on its website instead of on the outdated EBBs.

Types of Respondents: Interstate pipelines subject to FERC regulation under the Natural Gas Act, and those entities defined as Hinshaw Pipelines under the Natural Gas Policy Act.

Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual public reporting burden  1 for the information collection as shown in the following table:

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.

This notice announces changes to the maximum amount of each civil money penalty (CMP) within the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC) jurisdiction to administer to account for inflation under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (1990 Adjustment Act), 1 as amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (2015 Adjustment Act). 2 Under the 1990 Adjustment Act, as amended, federal agencies must make annual adjustments to the maximum amount of each CMP the agency administers. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required to issue guidance to federal agencies no later than December 15 of each year providing an inflation-adjustment multiplier ( i.e., the inflation-adjustment factor agencies must use) applicable to CMPs assessed in the following year.

Agencies are required to publish their CMPs, adjusted under the multiplier provided by the OMB, by January 15 of the applicable year. Agencies, like the FDIC, that have codified the statutory formula for making the CMP adjustments may make annual inflation adjustments by providing notice in the Federal Register . 3

On December 23, 2020, the OMB issued guidance to affected agencies on implementing the required annual adjustment, which guidance included the relevant inflation multiplier. 4 The FDIC has applied that multiplier to the maximum CMPs allowable in 2020 for FDIC-supervised institutions to calculate the maximum amount of CMPs that may be assessed by the FDIC in 2021. 5 There were no new statutory CMPs administered by the FDIC during 2020.

The following charts provide the inflation-adjusted maximum CMP amounts for use after January 15, 2021—the effective date of the 2021 annual adjustments—under 12 CFR part 308, for conduct occurring on or after November 2, 2015:

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

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before February 5, 2021. Write “E. & J. Gallo Winery and Constellation Brands; File No. 191 0110” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.

Due to protective actions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the agency's heightened security screening, postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay. We strongly encourage you to submit your comments online through the https://www.regulations.gov website.

If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “E. & J. Gallo Winery and Constellation Brands; File No. 191 0110” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580; or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

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

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

Visit the FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the news release describing this matter. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before February 5, 2021. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted for public comment, subject to final approval, an Agreement Containing Consent Orders (“Consent Agreement”) from Respondent E. & J. Gallo Winery (“Gallo”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Respondent Dry Creek Corporation (“Dry Creek”), and Respondent Constellation Brands, Inc. (“Constellation”) (collectively, “Respondents”). The purpose of the Consent Agreement is to remedy the anticompetitive effects that would likely result from Gallo's acquisition of certain Constellation assets (“the Acquisition”).

To resolve the Commission's concerns, Gallo and Constellation elected to remove J Roget, Cook's, Paul Masson brandy, high color concentrates (“HCCs”), and the Mission Bell winery from the asset purchase agreement. Under the terms of the proposed Decision and Order (“Order”) contained in the Consent Agreement, Constellation is required to maintain the viability of the J Roget and Cook's assets. The Order also requires that (1) Constellation divest its Paul Masson brandy to the Sazerac Company, Inc. (“Sazerac”); (2) Gallo divest its Sheffield Cellars and Fairbanks low-priced port and sherry brands to Precept Brands LLC (“Precept”); and (3) Constellation divest its HCCs business to the Vie-Del Company (“Vie-Del”).

The Commission and the Respondents have also agreed to an Order to Maintain Assets. This order requires Gallo and Constellation to retain and maintain the assets that the Consent Agreement requires them to divest, pending their divestiture. The Commission's Complaint alleges that the proposed Acquisition, if consummated, would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, by substantially lessening competition in the United States in the product markets for: (1) Entry-level on-premise sparkling wine, (2) low-priced sparkling wine, (3) low-priced brandy, (4) low-priced port, (5) low-priced sherry, and (6) HCCs.

The proposed Consent Agreement has been placed on the public record for 30 days for receipt of comments from interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will review the comments received and decide whether it should withdraw, modify, or finalize the Consent Agreement.

Gallo is a privately owned company headquartered in Modesto, California. Founded in 1933, Gallo is the largest family-owned winery in the world, with over 100 wine and spirit brands, and a portfolio that includes white wines, red wines, sparkling wines, dessert or fortified wines, brandy, and vodka. Gallo owns 15 wineries situated throughout California and Washington, over 23,000 acres of vineyards across California, glass and bottling facilities, storage facilities, and distribution channels in states where legally permitted.

Headquartered in Victor, New York, Constellation is a publically traded alcoholic beverage company. Founded in 1945, Constellation is the third-largest producer of beer and one of the world's leading premium wine companies. Constellation is one of the three largest wine suppliers in the United States; in fiscal year 2018, it generated approximately $8.3 billion in gross revenue.

On April 3, 2019, Gallo entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement with Constellation. Pursuant to the agreement, Gallo would acquire more than 30 mostly low-priced wine, brandy, concentrate and additive brands along with several wine-making facilities from Constellation in a transaction originally valued at approximately $1.7 billion.

Gallo's proposed acquisition of certain Constellation assets would likely result in substantial competitive harm in the following product markets: Entry-level on-premise sparkling wine, low-priced sparkling wine, low-priced brandy, low-priced port and low-priced sherry fortified wines, and HCCs. The United States is the relevant geographic market in which to assess the competitive effects of the proposed Acquisition.

Entry-level sparkling wine is often sold to on-premise retailers, such as restaurants, casinos, and hotels, for specific uses ( e.g., brunch mimosas, complimentary or “floor” pours, banquets, and catering). Sparkling wine outside of the entry-level tier is generally priced significantly higher than entry-level on-premise sparkling wine.

Gallo and Constellation are the two largest suppliers, by volume, of entry-level on-premise sparkling wine in the United States. Absent relief, Gallo would have acquired Constellation's J Roget brand, resulting in significant increases in concentration in a highly concentrated market, and giving rise to a presumption of increased market power under the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Further, Gallo's Wycliff brand and Constellation's J Roget brand are close and vigorous competitors in the United States. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have substantially lessened the significant head-to-head competition between Gallo and Constellation, and would likely have increased Gallo's ability and incentive to raise prices post-Acquisition. Entry into this market is difficult due to the specialized equipment and massive scale needed to produce sparkling wine at a low cost. In addition, the need for a nationwide distribution network and sales team to work with retailers present further obstacles to entry and expansion.

Low-priced sparkling wine (generally described in the industry as “popular” sparkling wine) is predominately sold to off-premise retailers such as grocery stores, liquor stores, and convenience stores. Low-priced sparkling wine does not significantly compete with more expensive “premium” brands.

Gallo's André and Constellation's Cook's brands are the two largest low-priced sparkling wine brands in the United States, with other competitors being significantly smaller. Absent relief, Gallo would have acquired Constellation's Cook's brand, resulting in significant increases in concentration and a highly concentrated market, and giving rise to a presumption of increased market power under the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. André and Cook's directly compete for shelf space and sales in the off-premise retail channel. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have substantially lessened the significant head-to-head competition between André and Cook's and would likely have increased Gallo's ability and incentive to raise prices post-Acquisition. Entry into this market is difficult due to the specialized equipment and massive scale needed to produce low-priced sparkling wine. The need for a national distribution network and sales force, and retail relationships sufficient to compete with established brands for retail shelf space, present additional hurdles to entry and expansion.

Brandy is a distilled spirit made from fruit, typically wine grapes. After distillation, it must be aged for at least two years in order to be labeled and sold as “brandy” in the United States. There is a large price and quality difference between low-priced brandies, which are typically produced domestically, and high-end imported brandies (primarily cognacs). Further, low-priced brandies do not compete closely with other types of spirits such as whiskeys, rums, vodkas, tequilas, and gins, since brandy has a unique taste profile and is often consumed straight rather than as a mixer.

Gallo's E & J Brandy and Constellation's Paul Masson brandy are the two largest low-priced brandies. Absent relief, Gallo would have acquired Constellation's Paul Masson brand, resulting in significant increases in concentration and a highly concentrated market, and giving rise to a presumption of increased market power under the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Gallo and Constellation consider each other's pricing when determining the price of their own low-priced brandy brands and compete to develop new products for these brands. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have substantially lessened the significant head-to-head competition between E & J Brandy and Paul Masson, would likely result in lower quality, and would likely increase Gallo's ability and incentive to raise prices post-Acquisition. Entry is unlikely to deter or counteract the anticompetitive effects of the Acquisition due to the significant capital investment and distribution network required for large-scale brandy production. Further, the need for certain state and local environmental permits makes entry or expansion difficult.

Port and sherry are types of fortified wines (wines to which a distilled spirit has been added, giving them a higher alcohol by volume) that are used for both cooking and consumption. Due to their flavor profile, alcohol level, and use, port and sherry brands are distinct from table wines and generic cooking wines. Further, there is a significant price gap between low-priced, domestic brands of port and sherry and high-end imports.

Gallo, which owns both the Sheffield Cellars and Fairbanks brands, and Constellation, which owns the Taylor brand, are the two largest suppliers, by volume, of low-priced port and low-priced sherry fortified wines in the United States. Absent relief, Gallo would have owned three of the top four low-priced port and sherry brands. The Acquisition would have resulted in significant increases in concentration and lead to highly concentrated markets, resulting in a presumption of increased market power under the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Gallo and Constellation are each other's closest competitors. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have substantially lessened the significant head-to-head competition between Gallo and Constellation, and would likely increase Gallo's ability and incentive to raise prices post-Acquisition. Entry into these markets is unlikely to occur due to the low level of interest in low-priced port and sherry from retailers, distributors, and third-party producers. In addition, producers of high-end imports have cost structures that render them unable to introduce a product at a price similar to domestic brands'.

HCCs are grape-based additives that have been concentrated using sophisticated filtration technologies into a thick, shelf-stable syrup. HCCs are made from a specific grape varietal, Rubired, and are used by winemakers to deepen the color and enhance the taste and texture of red wines. HCCs are also used by food and beverage manufacturers in jellies, juices, and other products. HCCs have unique qualities that are not replicable through the use of lower-level concentrates or other winemaking techniques.

Gallo and Constellation are the two largest HCC producers in the United States, and there is only one other domestic producer. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have resulted in significant increases in concentration and lead to a highly concentrated market, resulting in a presumption of increased market power under the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Gallo and Constellation are each other's closest competitors. Absent relief, the Acquisition would have substantially lessened the significant head-to-head competition between Gallo and Constellation, and would likely increase Gallo's ability and incentive to raise prices post-Acquisition. Entry into this market is difficult due to the need for technical expertise and significant capital investments in production equipment. In addition to potentially needing certain regulatory permits, firms making attempts at HCC production can only do so annually during a narrow harvest window, which results in a lengthy development process.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects in the aforementioned product markets. The proposed Order requires that Constellation retain and maintain the assets of the J Roget and Cook's brands. The Order also requires the following divestitures: Constellation will divest its Paul Masson brandy to Sazerac; Gallo will divest its Sheffield Cellars and Fairbanks low-priced port and sherry brands to Precept; and Constellation will divest its HCCs business to Vie-Del, no later than 10 days after the closing of the Acquisition. The Order further prohibits Constellation from selling or leasing, and Gallo from buying, the Mission Bell production facility without prior Commission approval. Constellation produces Cook's brand low-priced sparkling wine and HCCs at the Mission Bell facility, and will provide an interim supply of HCCs to the purchaser of that business.

The proposed Order and Order to Maintain Assets also appoint William Berlin as Monitor. The Monitor will ensure that the parties comply with their obligations under the proposed Orders and keep the Commission informed about the status of the transfer of the assets and rights to the approved acquirers.

Finally, the proposed Consent Agreement contains standard terms regarding each acquirer's access to employees, protection of material confidential information, and compliance reporting requirements, among other things, to ensure the viability of the divested businesses.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects of the proposed Acquisition in the entry-level on-premise sparkling wine market by requiring that Constellation take all actions necessary to retain and maintain the full economic viability, marketability, and competitiveness of its J Roget brand until four years after entry of the Consent Agreement. This remedy will preserve the status quo in the entry-level on-premise sparkling wine market, resulting in no change in market concentration.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects of the proposed Acquisition in the low-priced sparkling wine market by requiring that Constellation take all actions necessary to retain and maintain the full economic viability, marketability, and competitiveness of its Cook's brand until four years after entry of the Consent Agreement. This remedy will preserve the status quo in the low-priced sparkling wine market, resulting in no change in market concentration.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects of the proposed Acquisition in the low-priced brandy market by requiring Constellation to divest the Paul Masson brandy to Sazerac, a spirits company based in New Orleans, Louisiana. This remedy would allow Sazerac to add a significant lower-priced brandy brand to its portfolio while otherwise preserving the status quo in the low-priced brandy market, resulting in no change in market concentration.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects of the proposed Acquisition in the low-priced port and low-priced sherry markets by requiring Gallo to divest its Sheffield Cellars and Fairbanks brands to Precept, a winery based in Seattle, Washington. This remedy would launch Precept's entry into the dessert and cooking wine categories while otherwise preserving the status quo in the low-priced port and low-priced sherry markets, resulting in no change in market concentration.

The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the likely anticompetitive effects of the proposed Acquisition in the HCCs market by requiring Constellation to divest its HCCs business to Vie-Del, a producer of wine, spirits, and non-high-color grape concentrate products based in Fresno, California. Based on the Commission's due diligence of Vie-Del as a divestiture buyer, the Commission deems it necessary to include the following provisions in the proposed Consent Agreement to help ensure Vie-Del's success in the HCC business. Paragraph IV.B. of the proposed Order requires Constellation to provide assistance to Vie-Del in establishing production capacity equivalent to that of Constellation, and Paragraph IV.D. requires Constellation to produce concentrates to Vie-Del until Vie-Del is able to produce HCCs in commercial quantities and until transferring Constellation customers have qualified Vie-Del's HCCs to meet their specifications. These provisions will help ensure Vie-Del is able to expand its customer base while otherwise preserving the status quo of three independent HCCs producers, resulting in no change in market concentration.

The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed Consent Agreement to aid the Commission in determining whether it should make the proposed Consent Agreement final. This analysis is not an official interpretation of the proposed Consent Agreement and does not modify its terms in any way.

9000-0144, Payment by Electronic Fund Transfer—Other than System for Award Management.

This clearance covers the information that contractors must submit to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirement:

• 52.232-34, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—Other than System for Award Management. This clause requires contractors to provide the following information to enable the Government to make payments under the contract by electronic funds transfer (EFT):

(1) The contract number (or other procurement identification number).

(2) The Contractor's name and remittance address, as stated in the contract(s).

(3) The signature (manual or electronic, as appropriate), title, and telephone number of the Contractor official authorized to provide this information.

(4) The name, address, and 9-digit Routing Transit Number of the Contractor's financial agent.

(5) The Contractor's account number and the type of account (checking, saving, or lockbox).

(6) If applicable, the Fedwire Transfer System telegraphic abbreviation of the Contractor's financial agent.

(7) If applicable, the Contractor shall also provide the name, address, telegraphic abbreviation, and 9-digit Routing Transit Number of the correspondent financial institution receiving the wire transfer payment if the Contractor's financial agent is not directly on-line to the Fedwire Transfer System; and, therefore, not the receiver of the wire transfer payment.

The burden to provide the information required by the FAR clause at 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—System for Award Management, is covered by OMB Control Number 9000-0159, System for Award Management Registration (SAM). OMB Control Number 9000-0159 accounts for new registrations and renewals in SAM, which includes providing the EFT information.

The OMB Control number title was changed to “Payment by Electronic Fund Transfer—Other than System for Award Management” to be consistent with the accounted burden.

Respondents: 3,196.

Total Annual Responses: 3,196.

Total Burden Hours: 1,598.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 85 FR 67742, on October 26, 2020. No comments were received.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0144, Payment by Electronic Fund Transfer-Other than System for Award Management.

9000-0037, Presolicitation Notice and Response.

Presolicitation notices are used by the Government to inform, and, where specified, solicit a response from potential offerors or bidders. The primary purposes of the notices are to improve small business access to acquisition information and enhance competition by identifying contracting and subcontracting opportunities. This clearance covers the information that offerors must submit to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements:

• For sealed bidding (FAR 14.205), presolicitation notices briefly describe requirements and provide other essential information to enable potential bidders to determine whether they have an interest in the invitation and if appropriate, respond by communicating their interest in receiving the invitation for bid.

• For contracting by negotiation (FAR 15.201(c)), presolicitation notices provide a means of early exchanges of information about future acquisitions between Government and industry, to which potential offerors may respond with feedback concerning acquisition strategy, terms and conditions, and any other concerns or questions.

• For construction contracts (FAR 36.213-2), presolicitation notices are required for construction requirements in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold to communicate essential information on the requirements, to which potential bidders may respond communicating their interest in receiving the invitation for bid.

Contracting officers use the information as follows:

• For sealed bidding, to include interested bidders in the distribution of the invitations for bids; and

• For contracting by negotiation, to consider the industry feedback in shaping the acquisition strategy.

Respondents: 59,420.

Total Annual Responses: 178,260.

Total Burden Hours: 14,261.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 85 FR 66565, on October 20, 2020. One comment was received; however, it did not change the estimate of the burden.

Comment: The commenter requested the requirement for presolicitation notices be removed from the FAR. The commenter does not see their value; and stated that presolicitation notices lengthen the acquisition timelines unnecessarily.

Response: Presolicitation notices are required by statute; see FAR 5.201. The primary purposes of the notices are to improve small business access to acquisition information and enhance competition by identifying contracting and subcontracting opportunities. The commenter did not express an opinion on whether the estimated number of burden hours is accurate; or ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0037, Presolicitation Notice and Response.

Within the broader context of quality measure use and development, CMS engages in extensive ongoing measure development, quality reporting, and other measure-related activities. In particular, CMS works with measure developers to produce measures for use in CMS quality reporting and value-based payment programs. However, CMS recognizes the benefits of measure development by external stakeholders with quality measure development expertise such as clinical specialty societies, clinical professional organizations, patient advocacy organizations, educational institutions, independent research organizations, health systems, and other entities engaged in quality measure development, and is therefore providing this Notice of Funding Opportunity. The CMS Meaningful Measurement framework https://www.cms.gov/meaningful-measures-20-moving-measure-reduction-modernization guides CMS's quality measures work.

For this NOFO, CMS will accept an application specifically and only for development of radiology electronic clinical quality measures (eCQM) that fill an existing gap or need and are high impact. Pending an acceptable application and budget, the CCSQ/Quality Measurement & Value-Based Incentives Group (QMVIG)/Division of Quality Measurement (DQM) Program Team recommends awarding a single source award to Alara Imaging who is uniquely qualified to complete the work requested. Alara Imaging has specific expertise with CMS in development of radiology measure(s) requested, can provide the proprietary software needed to capture imaging data, and has the ability to transfer those data to CMS. In addition, Alara would serve as the measure steward responsible for guiding the measure through NQF endorsement and the CMS regulatory process.

This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

Description: The Administrative Subpoena is used by State IV-D agencies to obtain income and other financial information regarding noncustodial parents for purposes of establishing, enforcing, and modifying child support orders. The Notice of Interstate Lien imposes liens in cases with overdue support and allows a State IV-D agency to file liens across state lines, when it is more efficient than involving the other state's IV-D agency. Section 452(a)(11) of the Social Security Act requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to promulgate forms for administrative subpoenas and imposition of liens used by state child support enforcement (Title IV-D) agencies in interstate cases. Section 454(9)(E) of the Social Security Act requires each state to cooperate with any other state in using the federal forms for issuance of administrative subpoenas and imposition of liens in interstate child support cases.

Respondents: State, local, or tribal agencies administering a child support enforcement program under title IV-D of the Social Security Act.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 907,376.

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments 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; (c) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Description: The ACF Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE), at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) intends to request approval from OMB to renew a generic clearance to pre-test data collection instruments with more than nine participants to identify and resolve any question or procedural problems in survey administration.

OPRE studies ACF programs, and the populations they serve, through rigorous research and evaluation projects. These include evaluations of existing programs, evaluations of innovative approaches to helping low-income children and families, research syntheses, and descriptive and exploratory studies. To improve the development of its research and evaluation surveys, OPRE uses the pre-testing of evaluation surveys generic clearance to employ a variety of techniques including cognitive and usability laboratory and field techniques, behavior coding, exploratory interviews, respondent debriefing questionnaires, split sample experiments, focus groups, and pilot studies/pre-tests. These activities allow OPRE to identify if and when a survey may be simplified for respondents, respondent burden may be reduced, and other possible improvements. Following standard OMB requirements, OPRE will submit a change request for each individual data collection activity under this generic clearance. Each request will include the individual instrument(s), a justification specific to the individual information collection, and any supplementary documents. OMB should review within 10 days of receiving each change request.

The information collected in this effort will not be the primary subject of any published ACF reports; however, information may be made public through methodological appendices or footnotes, reports on instrument development, instrument user guides, descriptions of respondent behavior, and other publications or presentations describing findings of methodological interest. When necessary, results will be labeled as exploratory in nature. The results of this pre-testing research may be prepared for presentation at professional meetings or publication in professional journals.

Respondents: Participants in ACF programs being evaluated; participants in ACF demonstrations; recipients of ACF grants and individuals served by ACF grantees; comparison group members; and other relevant populations, such as individuals at risk of needing ACF services.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,825.

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments 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; (c) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Authority: Social Security Act, Sec. 1110 [42 U.S.C. 1310].

1. Sponsor Verification Application (Form SVP-3/3s): ORR is proposing several major revisions to the Sponsor Verification Application in order to collect more detailed information that will allow for a more robust assessment of sponsor suitability. ORR also removed the section that collected information on the individual identified to care for the UAC should the potential sponsor need to leave the country. This section was removed because it will be obtained as part of the sponsor care plan and not as part of the application process. Additionally, the application establishes a deadline of 45 calendar days for potential sponsors to submit the instruments in this collection, as well as supporting documents, imposed at the case manager's discretion. Allowing the case manager to set a firm deadline not only assists ORR in meeting its statutory requirement to release UAC from its custody without unnecessary delay, but also provides the sponsor and ORR with an official date of denial as opposed to leaving cases on an open ended “pending” status. Finally, ORR added an option for potential sponsors to voluntarily submit to a DNA test to prove that they are biologically related to the child in support of their application. DNA results can be used to prove a biological relationship exists in lieu of supporting paperwork (such as birth certificates) or where such paperwork is difficult or impossible to obtain and/or authenticate in a timely manner. ORR will pay for the cost of the DNA test. In some instances where ORR has serious concerns about fraud regarding the biological relationship of the child and the proposed sponsor or other individual in the sponsor's household, the agency may require an ORR-paid DNA test, before making a release decision.

2. Sponsor Care Agreement (Form SVP-4/4s): ORR is proposing to add an additional provision to the Sponsor Care Agreement requiring sponsors to enroll in post-release services (PRS) as a condition of release. PRS caseworkers will make initial phone contact with the released child within two days of release and an in-person home visit within 30 days of release. Subsequently, PRS caseworkers will contact both the released child and sponsor via phone at least once a month; and make additional in-home visits at least every 90 days. The PRS caseworker has discretion to decide how long phone contact and in-home check-ins need to continue. This additional provision will assist in ensuring that released UACs are thriving and will provide an opportunity for the UAC to express any safety or well-being concerns. It also assists in ensuring that sponsors are acutely aware of the responsibilities of sponsorship including ensuring that UACs attend immigration proceedings as well as continuing to meet educational and medical requirements as appropriate.

Respondents: Potential sponsors for UAC.

Annual Burden Estimates:

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments 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; (c) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

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

The Administration for Community Living (ACL) is requesting approval for a reinstatement with change for the information collection associated with the State Grants for Assistive Technology Program Annual Progress Report (AT APR) 0985-0042.

The information collected through this data collection instrument is necessary for ACL and states to comply with Sections 4 and 7 of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, as amended (AT Act). ACL is requesting a reinstatement with change of a previously approved information collection under OMB No. 0985-0042.

Section 4 of the AT Act authorizes grants to public agencies in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (states and outlying areas). With these funds, the 56 states and outlying areas operate “Statewide AT Programs” that conduct activities to increase access to and acquisition of assistive technology (AT) for individuals with disabilities and older Americans. Divided into two comprehensive activity categories: “State-level Activities” and “State Leadership Activities.” According to Section 4 of the AT Act, as a condition of receiving a grant to support their Statewide AT Programs, the 56 states and outlying areas must provide to ACL: (1) Applications and (2) annual progress reports on their activities.

Applications: The application required of states and outlying areas is a three-year State Plan for Assistive Technology (State Plan for AT or State Plan) (OMB No. 0985-0048). The content of the State Plan for AT is based on the requirements in Section 4(d) of the AT Act. As a part of this State Plan, Section 4(d)(3) of the AT Act requires that states and outlying areas set measurable goals for addressing the assistive technology needs of individuals with disabilities in education, employment, community living and information technology/telecommunications.

Every state and outlying area is required to include a minimum of seven prescribed measurable goals in its State Plan. These seven goals apply to all states and outlying areas in order to aggregate information on performance of the program at the national level. National aggregation of data related to these goals is necessary for the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) (Pub. L. 111-352), as well as an Annual Report to Congress (see “Section 7 Requirements Necessitating Collection” below).

Therefore, this data collection instrument provides a way for all 56 grantees—50 U.S. states, DC, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to collect and report data on their performance in a consistent manner, including a uniform survey to be given to consumers. This uniform survey is included as part of the data collection package.

Annual Reports: In addition to submitting a State Plan every three years, states and outlying areas are required to submit annual progress reports on their activities. The data required in that progress report is specified in Section 4(f) of the AT Act.

Section 7(d) of the AT Act requires that ACL submit to Congress an annual report on the activities conducted under the Act and an analysis of the progress of the states and outlying areas in meeting their measurable goals.

This report must include a compilation and summary of the data collected under Section 4(f). In order to make this possible, states and outlying areas must provide their data uniformly. This data collection instrument was developed to ensure that all 56 states and outlying areas report data in a consistent manner in alignment with the requirements of Section 4(f).

As stated above, ACL will use the information collected via this instrument to:

(1) Complete the annual report to Congress required by the AT Act;

(2) Comply with reporting requirements under the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) (Pub. L. 111-352); and

(3) Assess the progress of states and outlying areas regarding measurable goals in their State Plans for AT.

Data collected from the grantees will provide a national description of activities funded under the AT Act to increase the access to and acquisition of AT devices and services through statewide AT programs for individuals with disabilities. Data collected from grantees will also provide information for usage by Congress, the Department, and the public. In addition, ACL will use this data to inform program management, monitoring, and technical assistance efforts. While States will be able to use the data for internal management and program improvement.

A notice published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2020 in 85 FR 60803. There were 32 public comments received during the 60-day FRN comment period.

Proposed change in State Financing Activities: Financial Loan—partnership loans reported with no guarantee or interest buy-down have narrative description added to document subsidy/investment.

Comment Summary: Two State AT Act Program grantees commented in support. One organization representing the State AT Act Programs requested clarification.

ACL Response: Sentence identified as confusing has been deleted in the AT APR—IC document.

Proposed change in Reuse: Exchange—option for automatic exclusion of exchange recipients from performance measure data collection eliminated.

Comment Summary: Two AT grantees commented in support. One AT organization requested clarification.

ACL Response: Clarification text has been added into the AT APR—IC document.

Proposed change in Device Loan—separate type of borrower and type of device data reporting tables by purposed of loan.

Comment Summary: Three AT grantees commented in support. One requested clarification of timeline for implementation.

ACL Response: No changes made. ACL will clarify the timeline for implementation to begin with federal fiscal year 2022, with first data collection October 1, 2021 to provide time for data system revision.

Proposed change in Device Demonstration—separate decision-making participant from other participants reported in participant type table.

Comment Summary: Three AT grantees commented in support. One grantee and one organization commented in opposition with one saying this is duplicative data reporting and one saying it is understood that an individual with a disability is the decision-maker unless unable to be and then it is the caregiver/provider role. One grantee requested clarification of the timeline for implementation.

ACL Response: The proposed change is designed to support data fidelity by ensuring the decision-maker is identified by type within what can be a larger number of participants reported for each demonstration event. Currently all participants are reported by type. As a result, this change does not duplicate or increase data reporting burden. It only separates the decision-maker participant type reported from the type or types reported for all other participants. No change is made. ACL will clarify the timeline for implementation to begin with federal fiscal year 2022, with first data collection October 1, 2021 to provide time for data system revision.

Updated Outcome Measures—Overall acquisition and access performance measure tables and consumer satisfaction tables updated to align with outcome/output data and targets used by ACL for program evaluation and budget justification since FY18.

Comment Summary: One AT organization requested clarification.

ACL Response: Clarification has been added to the AT APR—IC document.

Proposed new data elements in Public Awareness and Information & Assistance—New question added for description of partnerships as part of public awareness, new data table added to report how individuals learned about the AT Program, new information request in Notes for description of partnerships that increase referrals.

Comment Summary: Five AT grantees and one AT organization commented in opposition to these changes and the new data element. All commenters expressed concern about lack of clarity and significant new data burden (both for AT Programs and consumers) associated with the proposed new data collection requirements.

Commenters suggested these new data elements be removed and requested ACL work with AT Act grantees to determine the most efficient and effective way to report referral source data in a future information collection.

ACL Response: ACL is appreciative of the participation of AT stakeholders in the Federal Register Notice comment process and values the submission of comments on the proposed updates to the Public Awareness and Information and Assistance sections of the AT APR data collection instrument. Once approved, ACL intends to address and work through these changes with AT stakeholders to identify the most efficient and effective way to collect referral source data in the Information Collection.

State Improvement Outcomes—new optional section added to collect data on coordination and collaboration with two new required narratives and associated drop-down menu data.

Comment Summary: Two AT grantees commented in support.

ACL Response: No changes made.

Leveraged Funding—eliminated Section B and folded data into Section A to simplify.

Comment Summary: Two AT grantees commented in support.

ACL Response: No changes made.

Instruction Manual—deleted redundant text and updated AT Taxonomy.

Comment Summary: Two AT grantees commented in support.

ACL Response: No changes made.

ACL estimates the burden associated with this collection of information as follows:

(A) A web-based system that collects data from states.

(B) A performance measurement survey that states collect from individuals

(C) A customer satisfaction survey that states collect from individuals.

(A) Fifty-six grantees report to ACL using the web-based data collection system. A workgroup of grantees estimated that the average amount of time required to complete all responses to the data collection instrument is 80 hours annually. The estimated response burden includes time to review the instructions, gather existing data, and complete and review the data entries. These estimates are based on the experience of staff who implement these programs at the state level. In addition, we project that clean-up and clarification of data elements will require no change in data burden estimates.

(B) The fifty-six grantees ask consumers to complete surveys that provide information on their performance related to the state's measurable goals. Historical data from states indicates that the average state will ask for this information from 3,242 consumers at 1 minute per consumer to complete the question survey, for a total of 54 hours annually.

(C) The fifty-six grantees also ask consumers to complete customer satisfaction surveys. Historical data from states indicated that the average state asks for this information from 3,242 consumers at 1 minute per consumer, for a total of 54 hours annually.

The majority of assisted reproduction technology (ART) devices directly or indirectly contact gametes and/or embryos during use. The mouse embryo assay (MEA) is used to assess the potential for embryotoxicity of devices that contact gametes and/or embryos. Several classification regulations under part 884 (21 CFR part 884) include special controls that require MEA testing or information. MEA may also be used by sponsors to support premarket submissions for other devices that are intended to contact gametes and/or embryos during their use. However, there are no voluntary consensus standards that describe how to conduct the MEA. This guidance provides recommendations for conducting the MEA to support premarket submissions and lot release for ART devices that are intended to contact gametes and/or embryos and to comply with the special controls for those devices classified under part 884 that require MEA testing or information.

A notice of availability of the draft guidance appeared in the Federal Register of June 13, 2019 (84 FR 27637). FDA considered comments received and revised the guidance as appropriate in response to the comments, including minor technical edits and clarifications. Specifically, the final guidance includes revisions to recommend that liquid-based test articles should be prepared per the instructions for use; clarify FDA's recommended exposure time for test articles depending on their clinical use duration; include additional specificity on the number of embryos that should be used; discuss how accelerated aging can also be used to develop test articles at the end of the proposed shelf-life; and when procedural modifications or options should be justified in the test report. In addition, FDA made editorial changes to the guidance for clarity.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Mouse Embryo Assay for Assisted Reproduction Technology Devices.” 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 interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov and at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Mouse Embryo Assay for Assisted Reproduction Technology Devices” may send an email request to CDRH-Guidance@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number 16015 and complete title to identify the guidance you are requesting.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. 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 have been approved by OMB as listed in the following table:

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “IND Submissions for Individualized Antisense Oligonucleotide Drug Products: Administrative and Procedural Recommendations.” This draft guidance is intended to help sponsors developing individualized ASO drug products for a severely debilitating or life-threatening genetic disease.

The draft guidance addresses the approach for obtaining feedback from FDA, the expectations and process for making regulatory submissions to FDA, and high-level recommendations related to the requirement for institutional review board review of protocols for trials of individualized ASO drug products and the informed consent of participants. The draft guidance discusses the importance of early interaction with FDA, submission expectations for pre-investigational new drug (IND) meeting packages and IND applications, and ethical and human subject protection considerations.

The draft guidance is intended to help sponsors of such development programs, who may be relatively unfamiliar with FDA regulations, processes, and practices, seek feedback from FDA on their development programs and make regulatory submissions related to these development programs. The draft guidance is expected to facilitate the preparation of adequate pre-IND and IND submissions for review by the Agency, which may help enable prompt initiation of the investigation.

This draft guidance represents the first of several guidances FDA intends to publish to advise and help sponsors developing individualized ASO drug products for patients who have severely debilitating or life-threatening diseases or conditions and no adequate alternative therapy available to them to treat their disease or condition.

This 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 “IND Submissions for Individualized Antisense Oligonucleotide Drug Products: Administrative and Procedural Recommendations.” 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.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (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 21 CFR part 312 for the submission of IND applications, amendments, and safety reports; for investigator brochures; and for requesting a pre-IND meeting have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014; the collections of information for paper submissions of Form FDA 3500A have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0291; the collections of information for electronic submissions of Form FDA 3500 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0645; the collections of information in 21 CFR parts 50 and 56 for obtaining informed consent for prospective patients have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0755.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs or https://www.regulations.gov.

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 December 19, 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:

Additional documentation has been received for the following resources:

Under section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, any mine operator or representative of miners may petition to use an alternative approach to comply with a safety standard. In response, the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) or his or her designee may modify the application of a mandatory safety standard to that mine if the Secretary determines that: (1) An alternative method exists that will guarantee no less protection for the miners affected than that provided by the standard; or (2) the application of the standard will result in a diminution of safety to the affected miners.

MSHA bases the final decision on the petitioner's statements, any comments and information submitted by interested persons, and a field investigation of the conditions at the mine. In some instances, MSHA may approve a petition for modification on the condition that the mine operator complies with other requirements noted in the decision. In other instances, MSHA may deny, dismiss, or revoke a petition for modification. In accordance with 30 CFR 44.5, MSHA publishes every final action granting a petition for modification.

On the basis of the findings of MSHA's investigation, and as designee of the Secretary, MSHA has granted or partially granted the petitions for modification below. Since the previous Federal Register notice (84 FR 34950) included petitions granted through April 19, 2019, listed below are petitions granted between April 20, 2019 and December 20, 2020. The granted petitions are shown in the order that MSHA received them.

• Docket Number: M-2016-012-C.

FR Notice: 81 FR 42737 (6/30/2016).

Petitioner: ICG Illinois, LLC, 5945 Lester Road, Williamsville, Illinois 62693.

Mine: Viper Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-02664, located in Sangamon County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2016-013-C.

FR Notice: 81 FR 42737 (6/30/2016).

Petitioner: ICG Illinois, LLC, 5945 Lester Road, Williamsville, Illinois 62693.

Mine: Viper Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-02664, located in Sangamon County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2016-014-C.

FR Notice: 81 FR 42737 (6/30/2016).

Petitioner: ICG Illinois, LLC, 5945 Lester Road, Williamsville, Illinois 62693.

Mine: Viper Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-02664, located in Sangamon County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2016-034-C.

FR Notice: 81 FR 81810 (11/18/2016).

Petitioner: Warrior Coal, LLC, 57 J.E. Ellis Rd., Madisonville, Kentucky 42431.

Mine: Warrior's Cardinal Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-14335, located in Hopkins County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2016-035-C.

FR Notice: 81 FR 81810 (11/18/2016).

Petitioner: Warrior Coal, LLC, 57 J.E. Ellis Rd., Madisonville, Kentucky 42431.

Mine: Warrior's Cardinal Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-14335, located in Hopkins County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2017-004-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 16071 (3/31/2017).

Petitioner: Tunnel Ridge, LLC, 2596 Battle Run Road, Triadelphia, West Virginia 26059.

Mine: Tunnel Ridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-08864, located in Ohio County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2017-005-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 16071 (3/31/2017).

Petitioner: Tunnel Ridge, LLC, 2596 Battle Run Road, Triadelphia, West Virginia 26059.

Mine: Tunnel Ridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-08864, located in Ohio County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2017-006-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 16071 (3/31/2017).

Petitioner: Tunnel Ridge, LLC, 2596 Battle Run Road, Triadelphia, West Virginia 26059.

Mine: Tunnel Ridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-08864, located in Ohio County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2017-010-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 34701 (7/26/2017).

Petitioner: Peabody Gateway North Mining, LLC, 12968 Illinois State Route 13, Coulterville, IL 62237.

Mine: Gateway North Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03235, located in Randolph County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2017-011-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 34701 (7/26/2017).

Petitioner: Peabody Gateway North Mining, LLC, 12968 Illinois State Route 13, Coulterville, IL 62237.

Mine: Gateway North Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03235, located in Randolph County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2017-015-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 37239 (8/9/2017).

Petitioner: Prairie State Generating Company, 4274 County Highway 12, Marissa, Illinois 62257.

Mine: Lively Grove Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03193, located in Washington County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2017-016-C.

FR Notice: 82 FR 37239 (8/9/2017).

Petitioner: Prairie State Generating Company, 4274 County Highway 12, Marissa, Illinois 62257.

Mine: Lively Grove Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03193, located in Washington County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2017-041-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 4927 (2/2/2018).

Petitioner: Rosebud Mining Company, 301 Market Street, Kittanning, Pennsylvania 16201.

Mines: Cresson Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09308 and Madison Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09127, located in Cambria County, Pennsylvania; Barret Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09342, Knob Creek Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09394, Heilwood Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09407, Brush Valley Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09437, Lowry Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09287, Coral-Graceton Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09595 and Crooked Creek Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09972, located in Indiana County, Pennsylvania; Tusky Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 33-04509, located in Tuscarawas County, Ohio; Penfield Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09355 and Harmony Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09477, located in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania; Bergholz 7 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 33-04565, located in Jefferson County, Ohio; Mine 78, MSHA ID No. 36-09371, located in Somerset County, Pennsylvania; Vail Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 33-04645, located in Harrison County, Ohio; Darmac Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-08135, Dutch Run Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-08701, Parkwood Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-08785, Logansport Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-08841 and Long Run Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09468, located in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania; Kocjancic Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-09436, located in Jefferson County, Pennsylvania;

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2017-042-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 4927 (2/2/2018).

Petitioner: Cumberland Contura, LLC, Three Gateway Center, 401 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1500, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Cumberland Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-05018, located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.503 (Permissible electric face equipment; maintenance), 18.35(a)(5)(i) (Portable (trailing) cables and cords).

• Docket Number: M-2018-003-M.

FR Notice: 83 FR 15876 (4/12/2018).

Petitioner: Ciner Wyoming LLC, P.O. Box 513, 254 County Road 4-6, Green River, Wyoming 82935.

Mine: Big Island Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 48-00154, located in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.223 05 (Approved equipment (III mines)).

• Docket Number: M-2018-005-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 15876 (4/12/2018).

Petitioner: Hamilton County Coal, LLC, 18033 County Road 500E, Dahlgren, Illinois 62828-4294.

Mine: Hamilton Mine No. 1, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03203, located in Hamilton County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.503 (Permissible electric face equipment; maintenance) and 30 CFR 18.35 (Portable (trailing) cables and cords).

• Docket Number: M-2018-019-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 57508 (11/15/2018).

Petitioner: Knight Hawk Coal, LLC, 1710 State Route 154, Pinckneyville, Illinois 62274.

Mine: Prairie Eagle Underground Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03147, located in Perry County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2018-020-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 66758 (12/27/2018).

Petitioner: Signal Peak Energy, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Bull Mountains Mine No. 1, MSHA I.D. No. 24-01950, located in Musselshell County, Montana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2018-021-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 66758 (12/27/2018).

Petitioner: Signal Peak Energy, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Bull Mountains Mine No. 1, MSHA I.D. No. 24-01950, located in Musselshell County, Montana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2018-022-C.

FR Notice: 83 FR 66758 (12/27/2018).

Petitioner: Signal Peak Energy, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Bull Mountains Mine No. 1, MSHA I.D. No. 24-01950, located in Musselshell County, Montana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2018-023-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 5111 (2/20/2019).

Petitioner: Little Buck Coal Company, 21 Pine Lane, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania 17963.

Mine: Broad Mountain Slope, MSHA I.D. No. 36-10233, located in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1200(d), (h) and (i) (Mine map).

• Docket Number: M-2018-024-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 5111 (2/20/2019).

Petitioner: Little Buck Coal Company, 21 Pine Lane, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania 17963.

Mine: Broad Mountain Slope, MSHA I.D. No. 36-10233, located in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1202-1(a) (Temporary notations, revisions, and supplements).

• Docket Number: M-2018-025-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 5111 (2/20/2019).

Petitioner: Little Buck Coal Company, 21 Pine Lane, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania 17963.

Mine: Broad Mountain Slope, MSHA I.D. No. 36-10233, located in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1400 (Hoisting equipment; general).

• Docket Number: M-2018-026-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 5108 (2/20/2019).

Petitioner: Castle Valley Mining, LLC, P.O. Box 475, Huntington, Utah 84528.

Mine: Castle Valley Mine No. 3, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02263 and Castle Valley Mine No. 4, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02335, located in Emery County, Utah.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-002-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28077 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Cumberland Contura, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Cumberland Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-05018, located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-003-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28077 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Cumberland Contura, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Cumberland Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-05018, located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; out by the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-004-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28077 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Cumberland Contura, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Cumberland Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 36-05018, located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-004-M.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38646 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Solvay Chemicals, Inc., P.O. Box 1167, 400 County Road 85, Green River, WY 82935.

Mine: Solvay Chemicals, Inc. Mine, MSHA I.D. 48-01295, located in Sweetwater County, WY.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.22305 (Approved equipment (III mines)).

• Docket Number: M-2019-005-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 20430 (5/9/2019).

Petitioner: Castle Valley Mining LLC, P.O. Box 475, 5550 W Bear Canton Rd., Huntington, Utah 84528.

Mine: Castle Valley Mine No. 3, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02263, located in Emery County, Utah.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-006-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 20430 (5/9/2019).

Petitioner: Castle Valley Mining LLC, P.O. Box 475, 5550 W Bear Canyon Rd., Huntington, Utah 84528.

Mine: Castle Valley Mine No. 3, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02263, located in Emery County, Utah.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-006-M.

FR Notice: 84 FR 49561 (9/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hecla Limited, Lucky Friday Unit, 397 Friday Ave., Mullan, ID 83846.

Mine: Lucky Friday, MSHA I.D. No. 10-00088, located in Shoshone County, Idaho.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.11052(d) (Refuge areas).

• Docket No. M-2019-007-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Eagle 3 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09427, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-007-M.

FR Notice: 84 FR 64107 (11/20/2019).

Petitioner: Genesis Alkali, LLC, P.O. Box 872, 580 Westvaco Rd., Green River, WY 82935.

Mine: Genesis Alkali @WESTVACO, MSHA I.D. No. 48-00152, located in Sweetwater County, WY.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.22305 (Approved equipment (III mines)).

• Docket Number: M-2019-008-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Eagle 3 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09427, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-009-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Eagle 3 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09427, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-010-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Flying Eagle Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09471, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-011-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Flying Eagle Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09471, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-012-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 28083 (6/17/2019).

Petitioner: Rockwell Mining, LLC, Three Gateway Center, Suite 1500, 401 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-1000.

Mine: Flying Eagle Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09471, located in Wyoming County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-018-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 29881 (6/25/2019).

Petitioner: Hartshorne Mining Group, LLC, P.O. Box 449, Calhoun, Kentucky 42327.

Mine: Poplar Grove Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-19806, located in McLean County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-019-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 29881 (6/25/2019).

Petitioner: Hartshorne Mining, LLC, P.O. Box 449, Calhoun, Kentucky 42327.

Mine: Poplar Grove Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-19806, located in McLean County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number M-2019-021-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43820 8/22/2019.

Petitioner: Monongalia County Coal Company, P.O. Box 72, Brave, Pennsylvania 15316.

Mine: Monongalia County Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-01968, located in Monongalia County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.503 (Permissible electric face equipment; maintenance) and 18.35(a)(5)(i) (Portable (trailing) cables and cords).

• Docket Number: M-2019-022-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43820 (8/22/2019).

Petitioner: Sunrise Coal, LLC, 12661 N Agricare Road, Oaktown, Indiana 47561.

Mine: Oaktown Fuels No. 1, MSHA I.D. No. 12-02394, located in Knox County, Indiana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-023-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43820 (8/22/2019).

Petitioner: Sunrise Coal, LLC, 12661 N Agricare Road, Oaktown, Indiana 47561.

Mine: Oaktown Fuels No. 2, MSHA I.D. No. 12-02418, located in Knox County, Indiana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-028-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 77 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-09636, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-029-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 77 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-09636, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-030-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 77 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-09636, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-031-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Calvary No. 81 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-12753, located in Leslie County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-032-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Calvary No. 81 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-12753, located in Leslie County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-033-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Calvary No. 81 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 15-12753, located in Leslie County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-034-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Orchard Branch Mine No. 89, MSHA I.D. No. 15-19405, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-035-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Orchard Branch Mine No. 89, MSHA I.D. No. 15-19405, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-036-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 38649 (8/7/2019).

Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Orchard Branch Mine No. 89, MSHA I.D. No. 15-19405, located in Perry County, Kentucky.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-037-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Buffalo Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09528, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-038-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Buffalo Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09528, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-039-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Buffalo Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09528, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-040-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Washington Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09294, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-041-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Washington Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09294, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-042-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Washington Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09294, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-043-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Muddy Bridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09514, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-044-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Muddy Bridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09514, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-045-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 43165 (8/20/2019).

Petitioner: Hampden Coal, LLC, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: Muddy Bridge Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09514, located in Logan County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-046-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 44925 (8/27/2019).

Petitioner: Jet Coal Co., Inc., One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 8 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09018, located in Mingo County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-047-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 44925 (8/27/2019).

Petitioner: Jet Coal Co., Inc., One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 8 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09018, located in Mingo County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-048-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 44925 (8/27/2019).

Petitioner: Jet Coal Co., Inc., One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219.

Mine: No. 8 Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09018, located in Mingo County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-049-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 48178 (9/12/2019).

Petitioner: Rock N Roll Coal Company, Inc., 4641 Greenbrier Mountain Road, Panther, WV 24872.

Mine: Mine No. 7, MSHA I.D. No. 46-09093, located in McDowell County, West Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1101-1(b) (Deluge-type water spray systems).

• Docket Number: M-2019-050-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 55175 (10/15/2019).

Petitioner: Peabody Gateway North Mining LLC, Six PPG Place, Suite 830, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.

Mine: Gateway North Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03235, located in Randolph County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d) (Permissible electric equipment).

• Docket Number: M-2019-051-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 55175 (10/15/2019).

Petitioner: Peabody Gateway North Mining LLC, Six PPG Place, Suite 830, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.

Mine: Gateway North Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03235, located in Randolph County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) (Electric equipment other than power-connection points; outby the last open crosscut; return air; permissibility requirements).

• Docket Number: M-2019-052-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 55175 (10/15/2019).

Petitioner: Peabody Gateway North Mining LLC, Six PPG Place, Suite 830, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.

Mine: Gateway North Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 11-03235, located in Randolph County, Illinois.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a) (Installation of electric equipment and conductors; permissibility).

• Docket Number: M-2019-054-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 64107 (11/20/2019).

Petitioner: Castle Valley Mining LLC, P.O. Box 475, Huntington, UT 84528.

Mines: Castle Valley Mine #3, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02263 and Castle Valley Mine #4, MSHA I.D. No. 42-02335, located in Emery County, UT.

Regulation Affected: 75.1909(b)(6) (Nonpermissible diesel-powered equipment; design and performance requirements).

• Docket Number M-2019-055-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 64107 11/20/2019.

Petitioner: INMET Mining, LLC, 144 E Market Place Blvd., Knoxville, TN 37922.

Mine: D-31 Cut Through, MSHA I.D. No. 44-06782, located in Lee County, Virginia.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1108(c) (Approved conveyor belts).

• Docket Number: M-2019-056-C.

FR Notice: 84 FR 64107 11/20/2019.

Petitioner: Marfork Coal Company, LLC, P.O. Box 457, Whitesville, WV 25209.

Mine: Markfork Processing, MSHA I.D. No. 46-08374, located in Raleigh County, West Virginia.