Forest Service
Census Bureau
First Responder Network Authority
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
Industry and Security Bureau
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
Air Force Department
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Community Living Administration
Coast Guard
Indian Affairs Bureau
National Indian Gaming Commission
National Park Service
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau
Employment and Training Administration
Copyright Office, Library of Congress
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Internal Revenue Service
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Office of Government Ethics.
Final rule.
In accordance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics is issuing this final rule to make the 2021 annual adjustments to the Ethics in Government Act civil monetary penalties.
Margaret Dylus-Yukins, Assistant Counsel, General Counsel and Legal Policy Division, Office of Government Ethics, Telephone: 202-482-9300; TTY: 800-877-8339; FAX: 202-482-9237.
In November 2015, Congress passed the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (Sec. 701 of Pub. L. 114-74) (the 2015 Act), which further amended the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-410). The 2015 Act required Federal agencies to make inflationary adjustments to the civil monetary penalties (CMPs) within their jurisdiction with an initial “catch-up” adjustment through an interim final rule effective no later than August 1, 2016, and further mandates that Federal agencies make subsequent annual inflationary adjustments of their CMPs, to be effective no later than January 15 of each year.
The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 as amended, 5 U.S.C. appendix (the Ethics Act) provides for five CMPs.
(1) Knowing and willful failure to file, report required information on, or falsification of a public financial disclosure report, 5 U.S.C. appendix 104(a), 5 CFR 2634.701(b);
(2) Knowing and willful breach of a qualified trust by trustees and interested parties, 5 U.S.C. appendix 102(f)(6)(C)(i), 5 CFR 2634.702(a);
(3) Negligent breach of a qualified trust by trustees and interested parties, 5 U.S.C. appendix 102(f)(6)(C)(ii), 5 CFR 2634.702(b);
(4) Misuse of a public report, 5 U.S.C. appendix 105(c)(2), 5 CFR 2634.703; and
(5) Violation of outside employment/activities provisions, 5 U.S.C. appendix 504(a), 5 CFR 2636.104(a).
In compliance with the 2015 Act and guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) made previous inflationary adjustments to the five Ethics Act CMPs, and is issuing this rulemaking to effectuate the 2021 annual inflationary adjustments to those CMPs. In accordance with the 2015 Act, these adjustments are based on the percent change between the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for the month of October preceding the date of the adjustment, and the prior year's October CPI-U. Pursuant to OMB guidance, the cost-of-living adjustment multiplier for 2021, based on the CPI-U for October 2020, not seasonally adjusted, is 1.01182. To calculate the 2021 annual adjustment, agencies must multiply the most recent penalty by the 1.01182 multiplier, and round to the nearest dollar.
Applying the formula established by the 2015 Act and OMB guidance, OGE is amending the Ethics Act CMPs through this rulemaking to:
(1) Increase the three penalties reflected in 5 CFR 2634.702(a), 5 CFR 2634.703, and 5 CFR 2636.104(a)—which were previously adjusted to a maximum of $20,489—to a maximum of $20,731;
(2) Increase the penalty reflected in 5 CFR 2634.702(b)—which was previously adjusted to a maximum of $10,245—to a maximum of $10,366; and
(3) Increase the penalty reflected in 5 CFR 2634.701(b)—which was previously adjusted to a maximum of $61,585—to a maximum of $62,313.
These adjusted penalty amounts will apply to penalties assessed after January 15, 2021 (the applicability date of this final rule) whose associated violations occurred after November 2, 2015.
OGE will continue to make future annual inflationary adjustments to the Ethics Act CMPs in accordance with the statutory formula set forth in the 2015 Act and OMB guidance.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b), as Director of the Office of Government Ethics, I find that good cause exists for waiving the general notice of proposed rulemaking and public comment procedures as to these technical amendments. The notice and comment procedures are being waived because these amendments, which concern matters of agency organization, procedure and practice, are being adopted in accordance with statutorily mandated inflation adjustment procedures of the 2015 Act, which specifies that agencies shall adjust civil monetary penalties notwithstanding Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act. It is also in the public interest that the adjusted rates for civil monetary penalties under the Ethics in Government Act become effective as soon as possible in order to maintain their deterrent effect.
As the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, I certify under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) that this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply because this regulation does not contain information collection requirements that require approval of the Office of Management and Budget.
For purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. chapter 5, subchapter II), this rule would not significantly or uniquely affect small governments and will not result in increased expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (as adjusted for inflation) in any one year.
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select the regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that rulemakings such as this implementing annual inflationary adjustments under the 2015 Act are not significant regulatory actions under Executive Order 12866.
As Director of the Office of Government Ethics, I have reviewed this rule in light of section 3 of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, and certify that it meets the applicable standards provided therein.
Certificates of divestiture, Conflict of interests, Financial disclosure, Government employees, Penalties, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Trusts and trustees.
Conflict of interests, Government employees, Penalties.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics is amending 5 CFR parts 2634 and 2636 as follows:
5 U.S.C. app.; 26 U.S.C. 1043; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, as amended by Sec. 31001, Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 and Sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74; Pub. L. 112-105, 126 Stat. 291; E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306.
(b)
(a) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any appropriate United States district court against any individual who knowingly and willfully violates the provisions of § 2634.408(d)(1) or (e)(1). The court in which the action is brought may assess against the individual a civil monetary penalty in any amount, not to exceed the amounts set forth in Table 1 to this section, as provided by section 102(f)(6)(C)(i) of the Act and as adjusted in accordance with the inflation adjustment procedures prescribed in the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended.
(b) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any appropriate United States district court against any individual who negligently violates the provisions of § 2634.408(d)(1) or (e)(1). The court in which the action is brought may assess against the individual a civil monetary penalty in any amount, not to exceed the amounts set forth in Table 2 to this section, as provided by section 102(f)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and as adjusted in accordance with the inflation adjustment procedures of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended.
(a) The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any person who obtains or uses a report filed under this part for any purpose prohibited by section 105(c)(1) of the Act, as incorporated in § 2634.603(f). The court in which the action is brought may assess against the person a civil monetary penalty in any amount, not to exceed the amounts set forth in Table 1 to this section, as provided by section 105(c)(2) of the Act and as adjusted in accordance with the inflation adjustment procedures prescribed in the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended.
5 U.S.C. App. (Ethics in Government Act of 1978); Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, 28 U.S.C. 2461 note (Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990), as amended by Sec. 31001, Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996) and Sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74 (Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015); E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306.
(a)
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Final rule.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting a rule pursuant to Section 36 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to exempt from the definition of “clearing agency” in Section 3(a)(23) of the Exchange Act certain activities of a registered security-based swap dealer, a registered security-based swap execution facility, and a person engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps that is eligible for an exception from registration as a security-based swap dealer because the quantity of dealing activity is de minimis.
Effective date: April 2, 2021.
Matthew Lee, Assistant Director, or Jesse Capelle, Special Counsel, Office of Clearance and Settlement, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-7010, at (202) 551-5710.
The Commission is adopting 17 CFR 240.17Ad-24 (“Rule 17Ad-24”) to exempt certain activities of a registered security-based swap execution facility,
The term “clearing agency” is broadly defined in Section 3(a)(23)(A) of the Exchange Act and includes a variety of functions.
Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) created new categories of entities in the security-based swap market that may perform clearing agency functions similar to the functions performed by entities excluded from the definition of “clearing agency” in Section 3(a)(23)(B) of the Exchange Act in the traditional securities markets. However, Title VII did not amend the scope of the term “clearing agency” to address these new types of financial intermediaries for the security-based swap markets or their potential clearing agency functions, even if those new intermediaries perform similar functions as entities excluded from the “clearing agency” definition, such as a national securities exchange or a securities dealer. As a result, certain activities performed for security-based swaps by security-based swap dealers and security-based swap execution facilities are also clearing agency functions that trigger the requirement to either register as a clearing agency or obtain an exemption from registration as a clearing agency, while the same activities performed for securities that are not security-based swaps do not carry the same legal and regulatory implications.
Specifically, Section 3(a)(23)(B)(ii) of the Exchange Act provides that the term “clearing agency” does not include, among other things, any national securities exchange solely by reason of its providing facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of securities transactions effected on such exchange.
Similarly, Section 3(a)(23)(B)(iii) provides that the term “clearing agency” does not include, among other things, any dealer if such dealer would be deemed to be a clearing agency solely by reason of functions performed by such institution as part of customary brokerage or dealing activities, or solely by reason of acting on behalf of a clearing agency or a participant therein in connection with the furnishing by the clearing agency of services to its participants or the use of services of the clearing agency by its participants.
To address the disparate treatment of similarly situated entities performing potential clearing agency functions, the Commission proposed Rule 17Ad-24 in 2011.
The Commission received one comment regarding the proposed rule,
Proposed Rule 17Ad-24 provided that a registered security-based swap dealer and a registered security-based swap execution facility shall be exempt from inclusion in the term “clearing agency,” as defined in section 3(a)(23)(A) of the Act, where such registered security-based swap dealer or registered security-based swap execution facility would be deemed to be a clearing agency solely by reason of functions performed by such institution as part of customary dealing activities or providing facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of securities transactions effected on such registered security-based swap execution facility, respectively, or acting on behalf of a clearing agency or participant therein in connection with the furnishing by the clearing agency of services to its participants or the use of services of the clearing agency by its participants.
One commenter agreed with the Commission's proposed approach that a security-based swap execution facility not be required to register as a clearing agency solely because it performs trade data comparison as part of the trade execution process for security-based swaps.
By its terms, proposed Rule 17Ad-24 would not provide a blanket exemption from clearing agency registration to a security-based swap execution facility to provide matching or trade verification services that otherwise are clearing agency functions as defined in the Exchange Act. Rather, the Commission's approach under Rule 17Ad-24 specifies that a registered security-based swap execution facility would not be required to register as a clearing agency solely based upon the fact that such an entity provides facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of securities transactions effected on such registered security-based swap execution facility.
Pursuant to the Commission's authority under Section 36 of the Exchange Act,
Accordingly, new Rule 17Ad-24 provides that a registered security-based swap dealer, a registered security-based swap execution facility, or an entity engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps that is eligible for an exception under 17 CFR 240.3a71-2(a) (or subject to the period set forth in 17 CFR 240.3a71-2(b))
In addition, as noted above, the Commission has granted a temporary exemption from the registration requirement for security-based swap execution facilities. The temporary exemption from the registration requirement for security-based swap execution facilities will expire on the earliest compliance date set forth in any of the final rules regarding registration of security-based swap execution facilities.
The Commission is sensitive to the economic consequences and effects of the adopted amendments, including their benefits and costs. Under Section 3(f) of the Exchange Act, whenever the Commission engages in rulemaking under the Exchange Act and is required to consider or determine whether an action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, it must consider, in addition to the protection of investors, whether the action will promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
The Commission is exempting entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and registered security-based swap execution facilities from inclusion in the term “clearing agency” under the Exchange Act for the following functions: (a) Performing customary dealing activities or providing facilities for the comparison of data respecting the settlement of securities transactions; or (b) acting on behalf of a clearing agency or participant in connection with the furnishing of clearing services.
To assess the economic impact of new Rule 17Ad-24, the Commission is using as its baseline the security-based swap market as it exists at the time of this release. This analysis uses existing Commission analyses of security-based swap market in rules adopted pursuant to Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, updated using data from the DTCC Derivatives Repository Limited Trade Information Warehouse (“TIW”) to calendar year 2019.
The Commission estimates, based on an analysis of TIW data that out of more than 4,000 entities engaged in single name CDS activity worldwide in 2019, potentially 50 entities may engage in dealing activity that would exceed the de minimis threshold, and thus ultimately have to register as security-based swap dealers.
In addition, eighteen swap execution facilities have permanent or temporary registration with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Security-based swap dealers must register with the Commission and comply with prudential and conduct standards of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The exemption in new Rule 17Ad-24 is designed to avoid imposing requirements with marginal or no benefit to safeguarding securities and funds and protecting investors on entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and security-based swap execution facilities, which will benefit these entities since they will not be required to register as a clearing agency or comply with the Commission's requirements for clearing agencies. Since these types of entities also each have their own registration and regulatory frameworks or are exempt due to a de minimis level of activity,
The cost savings to both entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and security-based swap execution facilities under new Rule 17Ad-24 are likely to be significant. New Rule 17Ad-24 will benefit entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and security-based swap execution facilities to the extent that additional clarity regarding registration requirements reduces the costs they may incur to determine which requirements apply to their activities. Furthermore, although no entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps or security-based swap execution facilities are currently registered as clearing agencies with the Commission, exempted entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and future exempted security-based swap execution facilities and security-based swap dealers will not have to incur registration and compliance costs for clearing agencies.
Because the exempted activities are not among the core central counterparty or central securities depository functions of a clearing agency, security-based swap execution facilities and security-based swap dealers would not unduly benefit from avoiding the higher standards of a “covered clearing agency.”
The Commission also does not expect new Rule 17Ad-24 to impose costs on security-based swap markets. Many of the requirements that apply to registered security-based swap dealers, such as recordkeeping, governance, margin, and capital requirements, cover risks that overlap with those facing clearing agencies.
Similarly, security-based swap execution facilities will have to register with the Commission and abide by the standards listed in the Dodd-Frank Act, as implemented by future Commission rules.
The cost savings associated with new Rule 17Ad-24 may promote competition among entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps and security-based swap execution facilities. For example, new Rule 17Ad-24 may lower barriers to entry for entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps, promoting competition among liquidity providers in the security-based swap market. Similarly, lower costs for security-based swap execution facilities that provide trade processing services should increase competition in providing these services, which may reduce the price and/or increase the quality of these services. To the extent that new Rule 17Ad-24 increases the availability of and competition between either liquidity providers or trade execution services, it may marginally improve efficiency of these services. The Commission does not anticipate new Rule 17Ad-24 to have a substantial impact on capital formation.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) imposes certain requirements on Federal agencies in connection with the conducting or sponsoring of any “collection of information.”
The proposing release provided notice that Rule 17Ad-24 does not impose recordkeeping or information collection requirements and would not be a “collection of information” within the meaning of the PRA. The Commission received no comments in response, and the Commission continues to believe that Rule 17Ad-24 does not impose a recordkeeping burden.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) requires the Commission, in promulgating rules, to consider the impact of those rules on small entities.
Because the exemptions provided in Rule 17Ad-24 ensure that certain activities of registered security-based swap dealers, registered security-based swap execution facilities, and entities engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps that are eligible for an exception under 17 CFR 240.3a71-2(a) (or subject to the period set forth in 17 CFR 240.3a71-2(b)) do not trigger the requirement to register as a clearing agency,
If any of the provisions of this rule, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act,
Pursuant to the Exchange Act, particularly Sections 17A and 36 thereof, 15 U.S.C. 78q-1 and 15 U.S.C. 78mm, the Commission is adopting Rule 17Ad-24.
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
In accordance with the foregoing, title 17, chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
15 U.S.C. 77c, 77d, 77g, 77j, 77s, 77z-2, 77z-3, 77eee, 77ggg, 77nnn, 77sss, 77ttt, 78c, 78c-3, 78c-5, 78d, 78e, 78f, 78g, 78i, 78j, 78j-1, 78k, 78k-1, 78
A registered security-based swap dealer, a registered security-based swap execution facility, or an entity engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps that is eligible for an exception under § 240.3a71-2(a) (or subject to the period set forth in § 240.3a71-2(b)) shall be exempt from inclusion in the term “clearing agency,” as defined in section 3(a)(23)(A) of the Act, where such registered security-based swap dealer, registered security-based swap execution facility, or entity engaging in dealing activity in security-based swaps that is eligible for an exception under § 240.3a71-2(a) (or subject to the period set forth in § 240.3a71-2(b)) would be deemed to be a clearing agency solely by reason of:
(a) Functions performed by such institution as part of customary dealing activities or providing facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of securities transactions effected on such registered security-based swap execution facility, respectively; or
(b) Acting on behalf of a clearing agency or participant therein in connection with the furnishing by the clearing agency of services to its participants or the use of services of the clearing agency by its participants.
By the Commission.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Order addressing arguments raised on rehearing and clarification, and providing for additional briefing.
On rehearing, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) modifies Order No. 871, which amended its regulations to preclude the issuance of authorizations to proceed with construction activities with respect to natural gas facilities authorized by order issued pursuant to section 3 or section 7 of the Natural Gas Act until either the time for filing a request for rehearing of such order has passed with no rehearing request being filed or the Commission has acted on the merits of any rehearing request. The Commission provides for further briefing on the issues raised in the rehearing requests.
The effective date of the document published on July 6, 2020 (85 FR 40113) is confirmed: August 5, 2020.
Tara DiJohn, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8671,
1. On June 9, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued Order No. 871, which is a final rule that precludes the issuance of authorizations to proceed with construction activities with respect to a Natural Gas Act (NGA) section 3 authorization or section 7(c) certificate order until the Commission acts on the merits of any timely-filed request for rehearing or the time for filing such a request has passed.
2. Pursuant to
3. In Order No. 871, the Commission explained that historically, due to the complex nature of the matters raised on rehearing of orders granting authorizations under NGA sections 3 and 7, the Commission had often issued an order (known as a tolling order) by the thirtieth day following the filing of a rehearing request, allowing itself additional time to provide thoughtful, well-considered attention to the issues raised on rehearing.
4. In order to balance its commitment to expeditiously responding to parties' concerns in comprehensive orders on rehearing and the serious concerns posed by the possibility of construction proceeding prior to the completion of agency review, the Commission, in Order No. 871, exercised its discretion by amending its regulations to add new § 157.23, which precludes the issuance of authorizations to proceed with construction of projects authorized under NGA sections 3 and 7 during the period for filing request for rehearing of
5. Three weeks after the Commission issued Order No. 871, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued an en banc decision in
6. On July 9, 2020, INGAA filed a request for clarification or, in the alterative, rehearing of Order No. 871. On the same day, Kinder Morgan and TC Energy also filed requests for rehearing.
7. We believe that the issues raised regarding this rulemaking merit further consideration by the Commission. Accordingly, to facilitate our reconsideration of the rulemaking and ensure a complete record for further Commission action, we provide all interested parties an opportunity to comment on the arguments in the rehearing requests, including, but not limited to, the issues enumerated below.
a. Should the Commission withhold authorizations to commence construction during the pendency of all rehearing requests? Alternatively, should the Commission withhold authorizations to commence construction only during the pendency of rehearing requests that raise certain issues or arguments? If the Commission were to limit such a rule to only certain issues or arguments, which issues or arguments should trigger that rule?
b. If the Commission were to adopt a rule of withholding authorizations to commence construction while rehearing is pending, should that rule apply to all orders pertaining to an NGA section 3 authorization or section 7 certificate or only a subset thereof?
c. In its rehearing request, INGAA poses a number of hypotheticals regarding circumstances that may unfold following
d. Should the Commission modify its practices or procedures to address concerns regarding the exercise of eminent domain while rehearing requests are pending before the Commission? If so, how?
e. If the Commission retains the rule withholding authorizations to commence construction while rehearing is pending, at what point in time should projects be permitted, upon receipt of an appropriate authorization, to commence construction? For example, should the Commission set a specific time, such as 90 days after the filing for a request for rehearing, for the Commission to issue an authorization to proceed?
8. Briefs shall be due within 21 days (February 16, 2021). Reply briefs shall be due 15 days thereafter (March 3, 2021). Barring exceptional circumstances, the Commission will issue an order addressing the issues raised on rehearing and in the briefs within 60 days of receipt of the reply briefs.
9. Submissions must refer to Docket No. RM20-15-001, and must include the filer's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address. The Commission encourages electronic filing via the eFiling link on the Commission's website at
10. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include docket number RM20-15-001.
11. All submissions will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section below.
12. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
13. From the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field.
14. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
15. The effective date of the document published on July 6, 2020 (85 FR 40113) is confirmed: August 5, 2020.
By the Commission. Commissioner Danly is dissenting with a separate statement attached.
1. On June 9, 2020, the Commission issued a final rule providing that an authorization to proceed with construction activities for a Natural Gas Act (NGA) section 3
2. I dissent from today's order because it: (1) Falls short of the Commission's obligation under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to address the arguments raised in requests for rehearing; and (2) will delay a ruling on the merits of the rehearing requests until approximately ten months after they were submitted, an action that surely is in tension with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's (D.C. Circuit) decision in
3. Whether the Commission retains the regulation as it is currently written, modifies it, or vacates it, the Commission is required under the APA to explain its reasoning. In doing so, it must respond to arguments raised by litigants. This requirement is fundamental to administrative decision making.
• A claim that the regulation could be read to prohibit issuing an authorization to proceed with construction where a request for rehearing is filed by a party in support of the project (including by the project proponent itself);
• an argument that the rule would not allow an authorization to proceed with construction where the party requesting rehearing is not an affected landowner;
• a claim that the regulation, as drafted, might not allow the issuance of an authorization to proceed with construction when a rehearing request has been denied by operation of law due to Commission inaction;
• an argument that the rule, strictly construed, might not permit the issuance of an authorization to proceed with construction when the rehearing request concerns an amendment to an existing authorization or subjects unrelated to landowner concerns, such as rates; and
• potential indefinite delay in the issuance of an authorization to proceed with construction.
These are legitimate arguments. They deserve a response by the Commission. The Commission is obligated to provide those responses, but all are sidestepped in today's order.
4. An inattentive reader who does no more than glance at the title of today's order might well be lulled into believing that it accomplishes more than it really does. This order is styled “Order Addressing Arguments Raised on Rehearing and Clarification, and Providing for Additional Briefing.” Despite the title, the Commission neither addresses the arguments raised on rehearing nor provides any clarification. Instead, with no explanation other than a bald declaration that “[w]e believe that the issues raised regarding this rulemaking merit further consideration,”
5. To the extent that the Commission suggests a more complete record is needed to consider the requests for rehearing, I disagree. The Commission received three requests for rehearing that detail arguments the Commission had not considered in issuing the final rule. These arguments are straightforward—implicating neither complex facts nor difficult legal principles. Although I acknowledge that the Commission may well have needed more than thirty days in which to address those arguments, the six months that have elapsed surely were more than adequate, and I see no reason why the Commission needs the additional ninety-six days afforded by today's order. Regardless, even if there were good reasons for needing more time, the Commission necessarily fails in its duties by offering no justification for further delay.
6. Moreover, the questions set forth for briefing are not confined to the issues properly raised on rehearing. One question asks whether the Commission should modify its practices or procedures to address concerns regarding the exercise of eminent domain while rehearing requests are pending before the Commission. No rehearing request suggests the Commission take this step. One wonders why this is the appropriate vehicle for such an inquiry, but it is not the proper vehicle to respond to arguments raised in the normal course of litigation.
7. The inquiry regarding eminent domain appears at odds with the Commission's well-developed body of law declaring that it lacks the authority to restrict a certificate holder's use of eminent domain once the certificate of public convenience and necessity is received.
8. The Commission's failure to address the substance of the rehearing requests might be understandable if the order directing briefing had been issued earlier. Indeed, the Court in
9. Finally, lest any reader of today's order overlook it, let's pause for a moment to consider the irony of what the Commission contemplates here. In the very same proceeding in which the Commission promulgated a rule specifically aimed at alleviating concerns that its tolling orders served only to “buy [the Commission] more time to act on a rehearing application and stall judicial review,”
For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.
National Indian Gaming Commission.
Final rule.
In compliance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (the Act) and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance, the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or Commission) is amending its civil monetary penalty rule to reflect an annual adjustment for inflation in order to improve the penalty's effectiveness and maintain its deterrent effect. The Act provides that the new penalty level must apply to penalties assessed after the effective date of the increase, including when the penalties whose associated violation predate the increase.
This final rule is effective February 1, 2021.
Armando J. Acosta, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel, National Indian Gaming Commission, at (202) 632-7003; fax (202) 632-7066 (not toll-free numbers).
On November 2, 2015, the President signed into law the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (Sec. 701 of Pub. L. 114-74). Beginning in 2017, the Act requires agencies to make annual inflationary adjustments to their civil monetary penalties by January 15th of each year, in accordance with annual OMB guidance.
In December of every year, OMB issues guidance to agencies to calculate the annual adjustment. According to OMB, the cost-of-living adjustment multiplier for 2021 is 1.01182, based on the Consumer Price Index for the month of October 2020, not seasonally adjusted.
Pursuant to this guidance, the Commission has calculated the annual adjustment level of the civil monetary penalty contained in 25 CFR 575.4 (“The Chairman may assess a civil fine, not to exceed $53,524 per violation, against a tribe, management contractor, or individual operating Indian gaming for each notice of violation . . .”). The 2021 adjusted level of the civil monetary penalty is $54,157 ($53,524 × 1.01182).
This final rule is not a significant rule under Executive Order 12866.
(1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on the economy or will not adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities.
(2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
(3) This rule does not involve entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of recipients.
(4) This regulatory change does not raise novel legal or policy issues.
The Commission certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
This final rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It will not result in the expenditure by state, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year. The rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, state, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. Nor will this rule have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This final rule does not impose an unfunded mandate of more than $100 million per year on state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The rule also does not have a significant or unique effect on state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, a statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531
Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this final rule does not affect individual property rights protected by the Fifth Amendment nor does it involve a compensable “taking.” Thus, a takings implication assessment is not required.
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this final rule has no substantial direct effect on the states, on the relationship between the National Government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
This final rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. Specifically, this rule has been reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and written to minimize litigation. It is written in clear language and contains clear legal standards.
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
This final rule does not affect any information collections under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This final rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
In developing this final rule, the Commission did not conduct or use a study, experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
This final rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
The Commission is required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule that the Commission publishes must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) use lists and tables wherever possible.
In accordance with the Act, agencies are to annually adjust civil monetary penalties without providing an opportunity for notice and comment, and without a delay in its effective date. Therefore, the Commission is not required to complete a notice and comment process prior to promulgation.
Administrative practice and procedure, Gaming, Indian lands, Penalties.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Commission amends 25 CFR part 575 as follows:
25 U.S.C. 2705(a), 2706, 2713, 2715; and Sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74, 129 Stat. 599.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a 48-hour time limit in Anchorage Area (B) in Bolivar Roads near Galveston, Texas. Anchorage areas (A) and (C) in the Bolivar Roads Channel already have a 48-hour time limit, but anchorage (B) did not. This resulted in vessels remaining in anchorage (B) for extended periods, blocking other vessels with pressing logistical needs, adversely affecting commerce and impacting navigational safety. Except when stress of weather makes sailing impractical or hazardous, this rule will prohibit vessels from anchoring in anchorage area (B) for more than 48 hours unless expressly authorized by the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston.
This rule is effective March 3, 2021.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander Sarah Rousseau or Lieutenant Junior Grade Ryan Gilbert, Sector Houston-Galveston Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 281-464-4736/5800, email
On October 11, 2018, the Texas Lone Star Harbor Safety Committee requested a regulatory change to the Galveston Harbor Bolivar Roads Anchorage area (B). The HSC submitted a recommendation to the Sector Houston-Galveston Captain of the Port that Anchorage area (B) be regulated under the same 48-hour time limit as the adjacent Anchorage areas (A) and (C). The HSC developed a working group, the Anchorage Working Group, to assess the optimal ways to use the anchorage to facilitate safety and efficiency within the port.
On January 28, 2020, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (85 FR 4919) that proposed to establish a 48-hour time limit in Anchorage Area (B) in Bolivar Roads near Galveston, Texas. The purpose of the propose rule was to align the Galveston Harbor Bolivar Roads Anchorage area (B) to the adjacent anchorages. This action is necessary to address port congestion
The Secretary of Homeland Security has delegated to the Coast Guard the authority to establish and regulate anchorage grounds in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 471; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. II, (63). The Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston (COTP) has determined that currently anchorage areas (A) and (C) in the Bolivar Roads Channel have a 48-hour time limit, however anchorage (B) does not. This has resulted in vessels remaining in anchorage (B) for extended periods, blocking other vessels with pressing logistical needs, adversely affecting commerce and impacting navigational safety. This rule addresses that problem by not permitting vessels to anchor in anchorage area (B) for more than 48 hours unless expressly authorized by the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston or without express permission if the stress of weather makes sailing impractical or hazardous.
We received six comments to the NPRM (85 FR 4919) published January 28, 2020. They all supported the proposed rule. We made no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed regulatory text in the NPRM. This rule establishes a 48-hour time limit in Anchorage Area (B) in Bolivar Roads near Galveston, Texas, by revising paragraph (b)(2) in 33 CFR 110.197.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the anchorage duration of vessels in a previously established anchorage ground. This regulation will have a positive impact on vessel traffic of the waterway, increasing the efficiency of the limited inshore anchorage space for Houston and Galveston.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The number of small entities impacted and the extent of the impact, if any, is expected to be minimal. The anchorage area is located in an area of Bolivar Roads that is not a popular or productive fishing location. Further, the location is in an area not routinely transited by vessels heading to, or returning from, known fishing grounds. Finally, the anchorage is located in an area that is not currently used by small entities, including small vessels, for anchoring due to the depth of water naturally present in the area. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows:
33 U.S.C. 471, 2071; 46 U.S.C. 70034; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(b) * * *
(2) Except when stress of weather makes sailing impractical or hazardous, vessels shall not anchor in anchorage areas (A), (B), or (C) for more than 48 hours unless expressly authorized by the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston. Permission to anchor for longer periods may be obtained through Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service Houston/Galveston on VHF-FM channels 12 (156.60 MHz) or 13 (156.65 MHz).
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is temporarily modifying the operating schedule that governs the Route 30 (Absecon Boulevard) Bridge across the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway (NJICW), Beach Thorofare, mile 67.2, at Atlantic City, NJ. This temporary modification will allow the drawbridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position to accommodate critical bridge maintenance.
This temporary final rule is effective from March 3, 2021, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2023.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Mickey Sanders, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth District, U.S. Coast Guard, telephone (757) 398-6587, email
On September 16, 2020, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled “Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway, Atlantic City, NJ” in the
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499. The New Jersey Department of Transportation, which owns and operates the Route 30 (Absecon Boulevard) Bridge, across the NJICW Beach Thorofare, at mile 67.2, in Atlantic City, NJ, requested the modification to allow the drawbridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position. The closure is necessary to facilitate bridge maintenance of the drawbridge, while ensuring the safety of those performing bridge maintenance and vessels navigating in the area. A work platform will reduce the horizontal clearance of the navigation channel to approximately 30 feet and temporary shielding will reduce the vertical clearance of the entire bridge to approximately 19 feet above mean high water in the closed position.
Under the temporary final rule, the drawbridge will remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 8 a.m. on March 3, 2021, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2021; from 8 a.m. on November 1, 2021, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2022; and from 8 a.m. on November 1, 2022, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2023. At all other times the drawbridge will operate per 33 CFR 117.733 (e). The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternative route for vessels unable to pass through the bridge in the closed position. Vessels that can safely transit through the bridge in the closed position with the reduced vertical and horizontal clearances may do so, if at least 30 minutes notice is given, to allow for safe navigation.
The Coast Guard provided a period of 30 days and two comments were received. One was in favor of the schedule change, and the other was outside the scope of the proposed regulation. No changes were made to the regulatory text of this temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard developed this rule after considering numerous statues and Executive Orders related to rulemaking.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that the closure will occur outside of recreational boating season on the NJICW, and only during specific daily hours. An average of only 40 annual bridge openings occurred for recreational vessels and light tugs from November 1 to March 31 between 2015 through 2017.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges and is categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum for the Record are required for this rule.
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(e) * * *
(4) From 8 a.m. on March 3, 2021, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2021; from 8 a.m. on November 1, 2021, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2022; and from 8 a.m. on November 1, 2022, through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2023, the drawbridge will be maintained in the closed-to-navigation position. A work platform will reduce the horizontal clearance of the navigation channel to approximately 30
Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on certain waters of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel Turning Basin, and the Hillsborough River, in the vicinity of downtown Tampa, Florida during the Super Bowl LV celebrations. The safety zone is necessary to protect the public and Super Bowl LV event personnel from the hazards associated with potential vessel traffic within the area of the safety zone. All persons and vessels would be required to transit through the safety zone at a steady speed and may not slow down, stop or anchor except in the case of unforeseen mechanical failure or other emergency unless given prior authorization from the Captain of the Port. Any person or vessel forced to slow or stop in the established zone must immediately notify the Captain of the Port Tampa via VHF channel 16.
This rule is effective daily from 12:01 a.m. on January 29, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. on February 7, 2021.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
If you have questions on this rule, call or email Marine Science Technician First Class Michael D. Shackleford, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department, Coast Guard; telephone (813) 228-2191, email
The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for bypassing the full notice and comment process because it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to do so in this situation. On September 22, 2020, the Maritime Subcommittee for Super Bowl LV notified the Coast Guard that during the Super Bowl LV event celebrations there will be several planned super bowl-related events throughout the waterfront areas of Tampa, FL. These events will occur at various times from January 29, 2021 through February 7, 2021. These events could lead to large gatherings of persons and vessels in waterways around the Tampa area. The Captain of the Port St. Petersburg (COTP) has determined that the potential hazards associated with persons and vessel congestion within the safety zone during these events is a safety concern. A notice of proposed rulemaking was published to the
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the
This rule establishes a safety zone from January 29, 2021, through February 7, 2021. The safety zone would cover certain navigable waters of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel Turning Basin, and the Hillsborough River, in the vicinity of downtown Tampa, Florida. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of persons, vessels, and navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled events. All persons and vessels would be required to transit through the safety zone at a steady speed and may not slow down, stop or anchor except in the case of unforeseen mechanical failure or other emergency unless given prior authorization from the COTP. Any person or vessel forced to slow or stop in the established zone must immediately notify the Captain of the Port Tampa via VHF channel 16.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, scope and duration of the safety zone. The rule will impact only a small designated area of Garrison Channel, Seddon Channel Turning Basin, and the Hillsborough
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting approximately 4 days that will prohibit entry to all navigable waters of Tampa Bay, Florida east of a line formed by connecting the points of 27°48′9″ N, 082°24′56″ W and 27°48′0″ N, 082°24′56″ W. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(2) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
(d)
U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
Final rule; correction.
The U.S. Copyright Office is correcting a final rule that appeared in the
Effective February 10, 2021.
John R. Riley, Assistant General Counsel, by email at
In FR Doc. 2020-29190 appearing on page 2176 in the
Approved by:
Office of the Secretary, Interior.
Final rule.
This rule revises U.S. Department of the Interior regulations implementing the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act to provide for annual adjustments of civil penalties to account for inflation under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 and Office of Management and Budget guidance. The purpose of these adjustments is to maintain the deterrent effect of civil penalties and to further the policy goals of the underlying statute.
This rule is effective on February 1, 2021.
Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program, (202) 354-2204, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240.
On November 2, 2015, the President signed into law the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (Sec. 701 of Pub. L. 114-74) (“the Act”). The Act requires Federal agencies to adjust the level of civil monetary penalties annually for inflation no later than January 15 of each year.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recently issued guidance to assist Federal agencies in implementing the annual adjustments required by the Act which agencies must complete by January 15, 2021.
The annual adjustment applies to all civil monetary penalties with a dollar amount that are subject to the Act. A civil monetary penalty is any assessment with a dollar amount that is levied for a violation of a Federal civil statute or regulation, and is assessed or enforceable through a civil action in Federal court or an administrative proceeding. A civil monetary penalty does not include a penalty levied for violation of a criminal statute, or fees for services, licenses, permits, or other regulatory review. This final rule adjusts the following civil monetary penalties contained in the Department regulations implementing the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) for 2021 by multiplying 1.01182 by each penalty amount as updated by the adjustment made in 2020:
Consistent with the Act, the adjusted penalty levels for 2021 will take effect immediately upon the effective date of the adjustment. The adjusted penalty levels for 2021 will apply to penalties assessed after that date including, if consistent with agency policy, assessments associated with violations that occurred on or after November 2, 2015. The Act does not, however, change previously assessed penalties that the Department is collecting or has collected. Nor does the Act change an agency's existing statutory authorities to adjust penalties.
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The Executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for rules unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only to rules for which an agency is required to first publish a proposed rule. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a) and 604(a). The RFA does not apply to this final rule because the Office of the Secretary is not required to publish a proposed rule for the reasons explained below in Section III.L.
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531
This rule does not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings implication assessment is not required.
Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. A federalism summary impact statement is not required.
This rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988. Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.
The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes through a commitment to consultation with Indian tribes and recognition of their right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule under the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and have determined that it has no substantial direct effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and that consultation under the Department's tribal consultation policy is not required.
This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and a submission to the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) is not required because the rule is covered by a categorical exclusion. This rule is excluded from the requirement to prepare a detailed statement because it is a regulation of an administrative nature. (For further information see 43 CFR 46.210(i).) We have also determined that the rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under NEPA.
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211; the rule is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy,
The Act requires agencies to publish annual inflation adjustments by no later than January 15 of each year, notwithstanding section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). OMB has interpreted this direction to mean that the usual APA public procedure for rulemaking—which includes public notice of a proposed rule, an opportunity for public comment, and a delay in the effective date of a final rule—is not required when agencies issue regulations to implement the annual adjustments to civil penalties that the Act requires. Accordingly, we are issuing the 2021 annual adjustments as a final rule without prior notice or an opportunity for comment and with an effective date immediately upon publication in the
Administrative practice and procedure, Hawaiian natives, Historic preservation, Indians—claims, Indians—lands, Museums, Penalties, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons given in the preamble, the Office of the Secretary amends 43 CFR part 10 as follows:
16 U.S.C. 470dd; 25 U.S.C. 9, 3001
This document was received for publication by the Office of the Federal Register on January 14, 2021.
Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor.
Proposed delay of effective date; request for comments.
In accordance with the Presidential directive as expressed in the memorandum of January 20, 2021, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” this action proposes, following a 15 day comment period, to further delay until May 14, 2021, the effective date of the rule entitled
The Department invites written comments on the proposed delayed effective date from interested parties. Written comments must be received by (postmarked, sent, or received) by February 16, 2021.
You may submit written comments electronically by the following method:
•
Brian Pasternak, Administrator, Office of Foreign Labor Certification, Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-5311, Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202) 693-8200 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone numbers above via TTY/TDD by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1 (877) 889-5627.
The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) published a final rule entitled
ETA seeks comment on the proposed delay, including the proposed delay's impact on any legal, factual, or policy issues raised by the underlying rule and whether further review of those issues warrants such a delay. All other comments on the underlying rule will be considered to be outside the scope of this rulemaking. ETA therefore seeks comment by February 16, 2021 on its proposal to extend the effective date by 60 days to May 14, 2021.
Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice of intent to establish committee; request for nominations.
The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) is announcing its intent to establish a Self-Governance PROGRESS Act Negotiated Rulemaking Committee (Committee) to negotiate and advise the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) on a proposed rule to implement the Practical Reforms and Other Goals To Reinforce the Effectiveness of Self-Governance and Self-Determination for Indian Tribes Act of 2019 (PROGRESS Act). The DOI is soliciting comments on its proposal to form a negotiated rulemaking committee; and invites nominations for Committee members who will adequately represent the interests that are likely to be significantly affected by the proposed rule.
Comments regarding the intent to establish this Committee and nominations for Committee members must be submitted no later than March 3, 2021.
Send written comments and nominations to Ms. Vickie Hanvey, by any of the following methods:
•
• Mail, hand-carry or use an overnight courier service to Ms. Vickie Hanvey, Office of Self-Governance, Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop 4660, Washington, DC 20240.
Ms. Vickie Hanvey, Program Policy Analyst, Office of Self-Governance, Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs; telephone: (918) 931-0745; email:
On October 21, 2020, the PROGRESS Act was signed into law.
This notice is published in accordance with the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996 (NRA) (5 U.S.C. 561
The PROGRESS Act requires DOI to establish the negotiated rulemaking committee to develop proposed regulations to implement subchapter IV, regarding the Self-Governance Program.
The Committee will be charged with developing proposed regulations for the Secretary's implementation of the PROGRESS Act's provisions regarding the DOI's Self-Governance Program. In negotiated rulemaking, recommended provisions of a proposed rule are developed by a committee composed of at least one representative of the Federal Government and representatives of the interests that will be significantly affected by the rule. In compliance with FACA and the NRA, the DOI will use the following procedures for this negotiated rulemaking. The DOI may modify them in response to comments received on this notice of intent or during the negotiation process.
The Committee will be formed in full compliance with the requirements of FACA and the NRA, and operate in full compliance with the NRA and the guidelines of its charter.
The Secretary is seeking nominations for representatives to serve on the Committee who can represent the interests listed in Section C, and who have a demonstrated ability to communicate well with groups about the interests they will represent. The Committee membership will consist of approximately 15, but not more than 25 members in accordance with the NRA.
Tribal Committee membership must:
• Include only representatives of the interests described below;
• Include representatives with a demonstrated ability to communicate well with groups about the interests they will represent; and
• Include Tribal representatives appointed by the Secretary that are:
○ Elected officials of Tribal governments acting in their official capacities;
○ Or their designated employees with authority to act on their behalf in their official capacities;
○ Representative of Tribes with a geographical balance; and
○ A majority of whom are representative of Indian Tribes with existing self-governance funding agreements.
• Comply with the FACA.
FACA regulations require the membership of a FACA committee to be fairly balanced in its member in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed.
Federally registered lobbyists are ineligible to serve on all FACA and non-FACA boards, committees, or councils in an individual capacity. The term “individual capacity” refers to individuals who are appointed to exercise their own individual best judgment on behalf of the government, such as when they are designated Special Government Employees, rather than being appointed to represent a particular interest.
Under Section 562 of the NRA, “interest” means, with respect to an issue or matter, multiple parties which have a similar point of view or which are likely to be affected in a similar manner. A limited number of identifiable interests will be significantly affected by the rule. Those parties are Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations as defined in section 4(l) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act that are currently participating in the Tribal Self-Governance Program and those that are not currently participating in, but are interested in participating in Tribal Self-Governance Program.
The DOI is accepting comments identifying other interests that may be significantly affected by the final products of the Committee, which may include report(s) and/or proposed regulations, until the date listed in the
The Committee is expected to meet approximately 3-5 times and each meeting is expected to last multiple hours for a consecutive 2-3 days each. The initial meeting will be held by teleconference and/or web conference; later meetings may be held either virtually or in person. The Committee's work is expected to occur over the course of 6-12 months, and it is the Secretary's intent to publish the proposed rule for notice and comment by the statutory deadline of July 21, 2022 (within 18 months of the anticipated date of the Committee's establishment). However, the Committee may continue its work for up to two years.
Because of the scope and complexity of the tasks at hand, Committee members must be able to invest considerable time and effort in the negotiated rulemaking process. Committee members must be able to attend all Committee meetings, work on Committee work groups, consult with their constituencies between Committee meetings, and negotiate in good faith toward a consensus on issues before the Committee. Because of the complexity of the issues under consideration, as
Under 5 U.S.C. 568(c), members of a negotiated rulemaking committee are responsible for their own expenses of participation in such committee, except that an Agency may, in accordance with Section 7(d) of the FACA, pay for a member's reasonable travel and per diem expenses, expenses to obtain technical assistance, and a reasonable rate of compensation, if:
• Such member certifies a lack of adequate financial resources to participate in the Committee; and
• The agency determines that such member's participation in the Committee is necessary to assure an adequate representation of the member's interest.
The DOI commits to pay the reasonable travel and per diem expenses of Committee members, if appropriate, under the NRA and Federal travel regulations.
The Committee may use a neutral facilitator. The facilitator will not be involved with the substantive development or enforcement of the regulation. The facilitator's role is to help the negotiation process run smoothly, and help participants define and reach consensus.
The DOI will provide sufficient administrative and technical resources for the Committee to complete its work in a timely fashion. The DOI, with the help of the facilitator, will prepare and provide a final report of any issues on which the Committee reaches consensus.
At the first meeting of the Committee, a neutral facilitator will provide training on negotiated rulemaking, interest-based negotiations, and consensus-building. In addition, at the first meeting, Committee members will make organizational decisions concerning protocols, scheduling, and facilitation of the Committee.
The members of the Committee, with the assistance of the facilitator, may adopt procedures for Committee meetings.
The PROGRESS Act requires that the Committee be comprised of only Federal and Tribal government representatives. Tribes may nominate Tribal leaders to serve on the Committee who will adequately represent the interests that are likely to be significantly affected by the proposed rule. Each nomination is expected to include a nomination for a primary representative and an alternate who can fulfill the obligations of membership should the primary representative be unable to attend. The Committee membership should reflect a diversity of interests, and nominees should only be of representatives and alternates who:
• Are elected officials of Tribal governments (or their designated employees with authority to act on their behalf) acting in their official capacities; and
• Will be able to:
○ Represent one or more of the specified interests with the authority to embody the views of that interest, communicate with interested constituents, and have a clear means to reach agreement on behalf of the interest(s);
○ Coordinate, to the extent possible, with other interests who may not be represented on the Committee;
○ Negotiate effectively on behalf of the interest(s) represented;
○ Commit the time and effort required to attend and prepare for meetings; and
○ Collaborate among diverse parties in a consensus-seeking process.
The DOI will consider nominations for representatives only if they are nominated through the process identified in this Notice of Intent. The DOI will not consider any nominations that we receive in any other manner. The DOI will not consider nominations for Federal representatives; only the Secretary may nominate Federal employees to the Committee.
Nominations must include the following information about each nominee:
1. A current letter from the governing body or chairperson of the Tribe representing one of the interest(s) identified supporting the nomination of the individual to serve as a representative for the Tribe on the Committee;
2. A resume reflecting the nominee's qualifications and experience, to include the nominee's name, Tribal affiliation, job title, major job duties, employer, business address, business telephone and fax numbers (and business email address, if applicable);
3. The interest(s) to be represented by the nominee (see Section III.C of this notice) and whether the nominee will represent other interest(s) related to this rulemaking; and
4. A brief description of how the nominee will represent the views of the identified interest(s), communicate with constituents, and have a clear means to reach agreement on behalf of the interest(s) they are representing.
5. A statement on whether the nominee is only representing one interest or whether the expectation is that the nominee represents a specific group of interests.
To be considered, nominations must be received by the close of business on the date listed in the
Members of the public are invited to submit comments on this proposal to establish the Committee.
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.
Following the receipt of nominations and comments, DOI will publish a second notice in the
Following the second
Under 5 U.S.C. 563, the head of the agency is required to determine that the use of the negotiated rulemaking procedure is in the public interest.
In making such a determination, the agency head must consider certain factors. Taking these factors into account, the Secretary, through the authority delegated to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, has determined that a negotiated rulemaking is in the public interest because:
1. A rule is needed. The PROGRESS Act directs the Secretary to conduct a negotiated rulemaking pursuant to the NRA.
2. A limited number of identifiable interests will be significantly affected by the rule.
3. There is a reasonable likelihood that the Committee can be convened with a balanced representation of persons who can adequately represent the interests discussed in item 2, above, and who are willing to negotiate in good faith to attempt to reach a consensus on provisions of a proposed rule.
4. There is a reasonable likelihood that the Committee will reach consensus on a proposed rule within a fixed period of time.
5. The use of negotiated rulemaking will not delay the development of a proposed rule because time limits will be placed on the negotiation. We anticipate that these negotiations will expedite a proposed rule and ultimately the acceptance of a final rule.
6. The DOI is making a commitment to ensure that the Committee has sufficient resources to complete its work in a timely fashion.
7. The DOI, to the maximum extent possible and consistent with the legal obligations of the Agency, will use the consensus report of the Committee as the basis for a proposed rule for public notice and comment.
For the above reasons, I hereby certify that the Self-Governance PROGRESS Act Negotiated Rulemaking Committee is in the public interest.
Postal Service
Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; invitation to comment.
The Postal Service is providing an advance notification and introduction to the Outbound Commercial Provider Initiative (OCPI) program. This document provides general information on the OCPI program, related mailing requirements, and shipping standards. The Postal Service is exploring the advisability of the OCPI program and providing support to mailers to assure their ability to adhere to the new OCPI program guidelines.
Comments on this advance notice are due March 3, 2021.
Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic, comments in response to this document will only be accepted via email—any comments or communications sent via fax or mail will not be accepted.
When sending communication and comments related to the OCPI program, the following instructions and guidelines apply:
• All comments and questions should be sent to the Manager, International Products and Major Accounts, Global Business, at the following email address:
• Communications must also include the following:
All submitted comments and attachments are part of the public record and subject to disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your comments that you consider to be confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may inspect and photocopy all written comments, by appointment only, at USPS® Headquarters Library, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, 11th Floor North, Washington, DC 20260. These records are available for review Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., by calling 202-268-2906.
Frank Cebello, 202-268-8058; or
The Postal Service is providing this notification to set forth the following general information and guidelines for the OCPI program:
1. An overview of the OCPI program with general information to advise and notify USPS customers, partners, and affiliates;
2. Discussion of the countries and specific products that will be serviced through the OCPI program; and
3. Specific changes and requirements associated with the OCPI program, relating to mail preparation, induction, and acceptance, such as:
4. References for advanced notifications of OCPI program feature changes.
The Postal Service expects to implement these new program service enhancements on or about March 31, 2021.
As cross-border eCommerce continues to grow and demand for a variety of shipping solutions continues, the Postal Service has encountered a need to identify alternatives for commercial shipments going through its international mail streams. The Postal Service relies entirely on foreign postal operators to deliver our customer packages worldwide, making outbound shipments subject to several limitations including shipping rates, transit times, and scan visibility. The rapidly expanding eCommerce market coupled with the increase in competition has motivated the Postal Service to explore alternate delivery service channels and competitive market strategies for product offerings in order to provide the services that customers demand, while remaining competitive in the global eCommerce market.
The Outbound Commercial Provider Initiative (OCPI) is a strategic program designed to help the Postal Service remain competitive in the cross-border shipping market, whereby it can effectively compete with alternative providers. OCPI also enables the continuity of service in situations where issues arise with foreign postal operators, such as strikes, unfavorable bilateral negotiations, COVID-19 impacts, or significant service issues. Creating an alternative channel also offers opportunities for providing enhanced service options. Additional benefits of the OCPI Program include but are not limited to:
• Offering new services that are currently unavailable through the postal channels;
• Improving service delivery times because of options to deliver products by commercial suppliers to select countries; and
• Providing a more enhanced customer experience, through advancements in customer service and package visibility on international outbound operations.
The Postal Service will be identifying opportunities and selecting designated country destinations and products for the OCPI program. Destination product and country pairings for OCPI will be the exclusive delivery options, however existing service will continue for destinations for which OCPI solutions are not offered. The products offered through the OCPI program will be international shipping services, limited to Priority Mail Express International® (PMEI®), Priority Mail International (PMI), and First-Class Package International Service® (FCPIS®). This allows for a more seamless transition for existing customers and mailers and avoids the confusion and capital that would be required to create and launch new dedicated OCPI product offerings. Products such as FCMI letters and Flats, Military Mail, IPA, and ISAL are not within the scope of the OCPI program. After publishing this document, the Postal Service will provide a more detailed description of the applicable OCPI changes to the existing products and procedures for USPS customers. The country-product designated for the OCPI program may change depending on future opportunities identified and potential foreign postal operator-related service disruptions.
For customers that tender shipments to the Postal Service in bulk and or consolidations, all shipments sent to OCPI destinations must be presented separately and in individually prepared receptacles by product class and destination country. Specific products that are destined for OCPI destination countries may not be tendered in any mixed country receptacles.
The OCPI program will require mailers to produce commercial invoices and customs forms to comply with commercial customs clearance requirements and differentiate OCPI documentation from existing postal forms. The OCPI program will also require additional recipient information to be provided by the sender (including recipient's phone number and email address) to comply with commercial clearance processes. The OCPI forms will be made available to mailers via online applications and electronically at USPS retail service counters.
The OCPI program has developed specific receptacle tags and customs forms which will allow operations personnel to identify and segregate OCPI products throughout the entire supply chain. In addition to International Mail Manual (IMM) updates, the Postal Service will provide industry notifications to inform all parties of OCPI program changes and provide examples of the new OCPI receptacle tags and customs forms to help integrate changes into the existing operational processes.
The Postal Service will provide a minimum of advanced 30-day notification regarding upcoming OCPI services or feature changes via
Federal Communications Commission.
Proposed rule.
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposes to permit geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) space station in the fixed-satellite service (FSS) to operate downlinks (space-to-Earth) in the 17.3-17.8 GHz frequency band, subject to certain limitations, and also proposes related technical updates to its rules governing the FSS and the Broadcasting-Satellite Service to prevent harmful interference.
Comments are due March 3, 2021. Reply comments are due March 18, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by IB Docket No. 20-330, by any of the following methods:
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the
Sean O'More, International Bureau, Satellite Division, 202-418-2453,
This is a summary of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 20-158, adopted November 18, 2020, and released November 19, 2020. The full text of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is available at
Interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated in the
•
•
Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
• Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the Commission no
•
The Commission will treat this proceeding as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
This document contains proposed new and modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget to comment on the information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we specifically seek comment on how we might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission considers permitting use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band by GSO space stations operating in the FSS, which would increase intensive and efficient use of the band and provide additional downlink capacity for high-throughput satellite communications.
In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice), we propose to permit use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band by geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) space stations in the fixed-satellite service (FSS) in the space-to-Earth direction on a co-primary basis with incumbent services. We also propose to permit limited GSO FSS (space-to-Earth) use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band on a non-protected basis with respect to fixed service operations. Permitting use of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to include FSS downlinks would increase intensive and efficient use of the band and provide additional downlink capacity for high-throughput satellite communications. With appropriate technical safeguards proposed herein, permitting the use of this band for GSO FSS downlink services would facilitate deployment of advanced satellite systems for the benefit of American consumers.
We propose to define an extended Ka-band in our rules,
The proposals herein, if adopted with appropriate safeguards, would result in efficient and effective use of the spectrum, alleviate the growing need for additional Ka-band GSO FSS downlink spectrum to support communications to gateway earth stations, and further streamline the licensing process of certain satellite systems.
The Table of Frequency Allocations is comprised of the International Table and the United States Table of Frequency Allocations (U.S. Table). In the International Table, the 17.3-17.7 GHz band is allocated, in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Region 2, to the FSS (Earth-to-space) and to the broadcasting-satellite service (BSS) on a co-primary basis, as well as to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis.
Historically, in the United States, the 17.3-17.8 GHz band has been used for FSS feeder
In May 2007, the Commission adopted rules for a new service that would use the 17.3-17.8 GHz band in the space-to-Earth direction to provide BSS. This service, known as the “17/24 GHz BSS,”
On March 5, 2019, SES
SES proposes we modify the U.S. Table to permit FSS downlinks on a co-primary basis in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band under its proposed technical rules. SES contends that such an allocation would comport with Commission policies supporting flexible spectrum use.
Telesat agrees with SES that FSS licensees will be able to use the band following the same framework for location and operation of gateway earth stations that currently regulate BSS feeder link operations in the band. Telesat also states that Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada is currently considering similar changes to the Canadian Table of
AT&T urges the Commission to carefully evaluate a number of technical concerns that could impact incumbent DBS and 17/24 GHz BSS operators. AT&T states that the Commission should consider whether authorizing FSS downlinks in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band could constrain future development or modifications of existing DBS systems, and the effect it might have on new applicants to provide DBS feeder link service. AT&T further argues that any rulemaking should consider the effect of proposed changes on other bands, such as the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, which is currently available for FSS uplinks. AT&T further suggests that we seek comment on the effect that allowing FSS downlinks in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band could have on operations that are co-located with, or near to, U.S. DBS licensees' facilities. Finally, AT&T contends that we should make clear that use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band for FSS downlinks does not extend to earth stations in motion, nor to non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) satellites.
SES claims that none of AT&T's contentions impede the Commission from initiating a rulemaking. SES further disputes AT&T's claim that authorizing FSS downlinks in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band could limit future modifications of BSS networks. According to SES, AT&T's claims are speculative and outweighed by the potential benefits of promoting more efficient spectrum use. SES also asserts that we should not prejudge whether FSS downlinks in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band can be used to communicate with user terminals, including terminals in motion.
We propose to permit GSO FSS (space-to-Earth) communications in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. We also propose technical rules to prevent harmful interference between stations or services in this band. With appropriate technical safeguards to protect incumbents, permitting the use of this band for GSO FSS downlink services would facilitate deployment of advanced satellite systems and enable the most effective and efficient use of the spectrum. We further propose to define extended Ka-band frequencies and to establish routine licensing criteria for earth stations seeking to operate in those frequencies.
The Ka-band is used extensively by FSS operators to provide satellite-based broadband access services using high-throughput satellites. In these systems, end user terminals uplink to space stations using one set of frequencies, and the space station downlinks traffic to earth station terminals using a separate set of frequencies (and back into the internet backbone). The satellites in these systems typically use spot-beam technology and high-order frequency re-use to significantly increase capacity and spectral efficiency.
Over the last ten years there has been an increase in the number of space stations using Ka-band frequencies that serve, or intend to serve, customers in the United States. In its petition for rulemaking, SES argues that there is a particular need for additional Ka-band spectrum for FSS gateway earth stations to support high-throughput satellite communications.
We propose to make the 17.3-17.8 GHz band available for more intensive use by FSS satellite operators, to meet the need for additional Ka-band GSO FSS downlink spectrum. We note that the need for additional spectrum for these services also has been recognized internationally.
In particular, we propose to add a primary allocation to the FSS in the space-to-Earth direction in the U.S. Table to permit FSS downlinks from geostationary satellites to operate in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band on a co-primary (co-equal) basis
AT&T, however, states that the Commission should make clear that any use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band for FSS downlinks would be limited to GSO satellites. We note that the interference-mitigation regime the Commission established for the BSS and DBS feeder links in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band presupposed only GSO satellites. In addition, Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations does not include equivalent power flux density limits at the Earth's surface for the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that are necessary to protect earth stations receiving GSO transmissions from harmful interference from NGSO operations. Accordingly, we propose to modify the U.S. Table, revise footnote US402, and adopt a new footnote NG58 to permit co-primary operation of FSS downlink transmissions in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band, while limiting FSS downlink operations to GSO satellite networks.
With respect to sharing of the 17.7 and 17.8 GHz band with the fixed service, we note that in 2000, the Commission designated the 17.7-18.3 GHz band for primary use by terrestrial services.
We note that allowing use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band by the FSS (space-to-Earth) would provide a contiguous band for FSS downlink operations at 17.3-18.3 GHz, along with the existing FSS use in the 18.3-18.8 GHz band.
With respect to FSS operations vis-a-vis other satellite operations in the
If adopted, we propose to implement our revisions to the U.S. Table by including a primary allocation to the FSS (space-to-Earth) but also including the new footnote NG58 that would permit authorization of earth stations receiving transmissions from GSO FSS space stations in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, strictly on a non-protected basis with respect to terrestrial fixed service operations. The relevant portion of this new footnote NG58 would read: “Earth stations in the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band shall not claim protection from stations in the fixed service that operate in that band.” We believe this approach will provide a certain level of flexibility to GSO FSS operators while placing no additional coordination burden on fixed service operators.
With respect to protecting incumbents from harmful interference, we note that § 25.208(c) includes angle-dependent PFD limits intended to protect terrestrial services from space station transmissions in the 17.7-19.7 GHz band. We seek comment on whether these angle-dependent PFD limits would adequately protect fixed service operations from harmful interference from GSO FSS operations in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band. Apart from these and the default service rules contained in § 25.217 we have no requirements specifically governing space-to-Earth FSS transmissions in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band. If commenters propose any additional rules to facilitate sharing, they also should address costs and benefits of adopting their proposals.
Although we believe that the above-outlined approach best achieves our goals of promoting spectrum efficiency and operational flexibility, we seek comment on alternatives and how we can protect the operations of incumbent services. AT&T asserts that when considering the entry of new FSS co-primary operations into the band, the Commission should consider the impact of these new operations on the future expansion of DBS uplinks. Although the recent removal of the DBS freeze should alleviate AT&T's particular concern regarding the timing of introducing these new operations, we nonetheless seek comment on this question generally as raised by AT&T. We believe that our proposed revisions to the U.S. Table allowing co-primary FSS downlinks in the 17.3.17.8 GHz band are compatible with existing operations in the band given the accompanying revisions to the technical requirements intended to protect the operations of incumbent services. Nonetheless, we seek comment on the possible impact to current and future DBS, 17/24 GHz BSS, or terrestrial fixed service systems, and we ask if the introduction of new GSO FSS downlinks into the band might have unforeseen or unreasonably constraining consequences to these systems. If so, we ask what course of action would best protect the operations of future and existing users.
We propose various requirements intended to facilitate both intra-service operations between 17.3-17.8 GHz FSS space stations and inter-service operations between FSS and17/24 GHz BSS space stations. Most of these requirements are already applicable to 17/24 GHz BSS space stations transmitting in the band, and we propose to extend them to 17.3-17.8 GHz FSS space stations either directly or with some modifications.
In its Petition, SES includes proposed modifications to both rule §§ 25.140, and 25.262. Under this proposed approach, FSS space stations would be required to maintain at least two degrees of separation from each other and would also be required to maintain a default orbital separation of at least four degrees from 17/24 GHz BSS space stations.
In determining what orbital separation would be most appropriate for FSS space stations seeking to operate in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band in the space-to-Earth direction, we consider not only accommodation of FSS operations in a manner most consistent with other FSS bands, but also harmonization of the operations of the three different satellite services operating bi-directionally in the same frequency band. We therefore propose changes to §§ 25.140(a) and (b), (d) and 25.262 of our rules, to require GSO FSS and 17/24 GHz BSS applicants seeking to operate in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, to demonstrate compliance with rules applicable to their service's particular orbital spacing requirements, while simultaneously accommodating adjacent neighboring space stations in other services.
We also seek comment on other alternatives, including whether we should apply the same orbital spacing requirements to downlinking FSS space stations as we currently apply to 17/24 GHz BSS stations, (
The Commission's current rules include PFD limits for 17/24 GHz BSS systems transmitting in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band.
At present, our rules do not include PFD limits for FSS space stations in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. In its petition, SES proposes PFD limits for FSS systems based on the existing regional PFD limit scheme, with some modifications.
The PFD limits contained in § 25.208 are largely intended to facilitate sharing between space and terrestrial services. Most are angle-dependent and closely replicate the PFD limits contained in
In the 17.3-17.8 GHz reverse-band sharing environment, receiving DBS space stations are vulnerable to space path interference
In addition, we propose to amend § 25.264(b)(1) and (2) and (e) to require that the PFD calculations at the DBS receiver consider the
The required angular measurement ranges and associated orbital parameters including longitudinal separation, inclination and eccentricity, are inter-dependent values. Accordingly, the off-axis angle occurring between two geostationary satellites will vary as a result of changes in these inter-dependent orbital parameters. The off-axis measurement ranges specified in our rules for 17/24 GHz BSS satellites are intended to encompass the angular range arising between DBS and 17/24 GHz BSS satellites with longitudinal separations as small as 0.1 degrees,
In its Petition, SES proposes FSS use in space-to-Earth direction for gateway earth stations, not direct-to-home consumer services. For such use, FSS operators will not have the same economic incentives to locate space stations at such small longitudinal separations from DBS satellites (
We propose to amend § 25.264(g) of our rules to apply 0.5 degrees as the minimum orbital longitude separation that transmitting FSS space stations must maintain relative to DBS space stations, and to amend § 25.264(a) to reflect the corresponding off-axis measurement angles,
In its comments to the
Would accepting simulated gain and PFD data obviate a need to reduce the angular ranges over which such measurements are made, based on its ability to alleviate the difficulties applicants and licensees experience in providing measured data? Or rather, would an increased orbital separation between space-to-Earth transmitting FSS or BSS and DBS space stations alleviate concerns associated with relying upon simulated off-axis gain data for determining likelihood of inference, recognizing that at increased longitudinal separation, the likelihood for space path interference is significantly diminished?
To demonstrate that the coordination trigger is not exceeded, § 25.264(a)(6) and (b)(4) of our rules require submission of PFD information calculated from the antenna off-axis gain data. The timing of PFD data submission is tied to the critical design review (CDR) process,
In the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, receiving FSS earth stations will be vulnerable to ground path interference from the Earth-to-space transmissions from nearby co-frequency DBS feeder link earth stations.
SES argues that 17 GHz FSS downlinks readily fit into the existing 17/24 GHz BSS regulatory structure and will not constrain the placement of additional future DBS feeder link facilities. SES points out that all existing DBS feeder link sites are grandfathered and permitted to make modest changes, and that entities seeking to establish protected 17 GHz FSS receiving earth stations would select locations well away from current DBS feeder link facilities.
In addition, our rules identify certain information that applicants proposing new DBS feeder link earth station must provide to a third-party coordinator to resolve any potential interference issues with affected 17/24 GHz BSS receiving stations prior to licensing. We believe that the same information should also be provided to a third-party coordinator to enable coordination with affected FSS receiving earth stations in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. Accordingly, we propose to apply § 25.203(m)(2) to FSS with no additional changes to the requested information. We seek comment on this proposal. The requested information is as follows:
• The geographical coordinates of the proposed earth station antenna(s);
• Proposed operating frequency band(s) and emission(s);
• Antenna diameter (meters);
• Antenna center height above ground and ground elevation above mean sea level;
• Antenna gain pattern(s) in the plane of the main beam;
• Longitude range of geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) satellites at which an antenna may be pointed;
• Horizon elevation plot;
• Antenna horizon gain plot(s) determined in accordance with the procedure in section 2.1 of Annex 5 to Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations;
• Minimum elevation angle;
• Maximum equivalent isotropically radiated power (e.i.r.p.) density in the main beam in any one-megahertz band;
• Maximum available RF transmit power density in any one-megahertz band at the input terminals of the antenna(s); and
• A plot of the coordination distance contour(s) and rain scatter coordination distance contour(s) as determined by Table 2 of section 3 to Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations.
DBS operators needing to coordinate with 17.3-17.8 GHz receiving FSS earth station operations must be able to determine those locations at which coordination is required. Receive-only earth stations are generally not required to apply for a license or to be registered with the Commission, although they may do so in accordance with the provisions of § 25.115(b) of our rules, to receive interference protection from terrestrial service in bands shared co-equally with the fixed service. We seek comment on how to facilitate coordination with DBS operators and to ensure protection from DBS feeder link earth station ground path interference. We propose that interference protection will be afforded to individual FSS receiving earth stations from DBS feeder link transmissions only if they have been licensed with the Commission, and we propose to amend § 25.203(m)(3) of our rules to reflect this requirement. We seek comment on these proposals.
We propose, however, to allow blanket licensed FSS earth stations (other than earth stations in motion (ESIMs)) on a non-protected basis in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band and propose to amend § 25.115(e) to reflect this. We seek comment on this proposal. SES asserts that the 17.3-17.7 GHz FSS downlink spectrum is needed to accommodate gateway operations, while other FSS bands would be used for ubiquitously deployed user terminals. SES further argues that sharing with incumbent services in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band is feasible in part because such gateway-type FSS earth stations would be fewer in number and more resistant to interference than the widely-dispersed consumer terminals. Given the already complex reverse-band sharing situation in the band, we seek comment on whether extending protection to ubiquitously deployed earth stations in yet another service could unduly constrain incumbent users. Commenters should discuss any consequences that may unduly constrain incumbent services as well as any benefits of allowing non-protected blanket licensed earth stations in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band.
In its comments AT&T asserts that we should make clear that any use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band for FSS downlinks would be limited to fixed earth stations. In reply, SES argues that the Commission should decline to prejudge this issue at the Notice stage, but rather should invite comment on the range of services that can effectively be provided by FSS in the band while remaining consistent with reasonable requirements to protect incumbent 17/24 GHz BSS and DBS operations. While receiving FSS earth stations in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band should not pose an interference threat to incumbent DBS, 17/24 GHz BSS, or fixed service operations in the band, ESIMs could unduly constrain incumbent services if there is a requirement to protect receiving ESIM stations in the band.
At this time, we do not propose to amend § 25.202(a)(8) or (10) of our rules to permit operation of ESIMs in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. We ask, however, whether such a modification could increase FSS operators' flexibility to use the band more efficiently, while still protecting and allowing sufficient flexibility for the operations of incumbent services. If so, what other modifications to our rules might be required to permit operation of ESIMs while protecting incumbent services and not imposing any undue constraints on their current and future operations in the band. The U.S. Table now includes footnotes in certain frequency bands that expressly preclude ESIMs from claiming protection from the transmissions of non-Federal stations in the fixed service.
Finally, we ask whether there are any other measures we should adopt in this proceeding to protect FSS receiving earth stations from DBS feeder link transmissions in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band.
Various conforming modifications to our rules are required as a result of the changes proposed above. We propose to modify the definition of a two-degree compliant space station in § 25.103 to include FSS satellites transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. In addition, we propose to modify § 25.114 to identify 17.3-17.8 GHz space-to-Earth FSS applicants alongside information requirements applicable to such applications, specifically in § 25.114(d)(7), (15) and (18). We similarly propose to modify § 25.115(e) to identify the information required for receiving earth station applicants in this band. Finally, we modify § 25.117(d)(2)(v) to permit 17.3-17.8 GHz FSS operators to modify certain restrictions that might be associated with their licenses according to the same procedures afforded to 17/24 GHz BSS operators. We seek comment on these and any other needed rule changes.
In the
In addition, § 25.212(e) affords an alternative approach to routine license application processing of FSS earth stations transmitting to GSO satellites in the conventional Ka-band that permits such applicants to demonstrate compliance with off-axis gain and accompanying input power density levels. Accordingly, we propose to extend this approach to earth station applicants seeking to operate in the extended Ka-bands by modifying § 25.212(e) and (h)
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
The NPRM seeks comment on several proposals relating to the Commission's allocation of frequency bands for use by the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) and technical rules and policies for preventing harmful interference between stations operating in the Fixed-Satellite Service and stations operating in the Digital Broadcasting Satellite (DBS) Service and the Broadcasting-Satellite Service (BSS). Adoption of the proposed changes would, among other things, permit the use of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band in the space-to-Earth direction by stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service.
The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 7(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 157(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r).
The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, where feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may be affected by adoption of proposed rules.
We anticipate that our proposed rule changes may have an impact on earth station and space station applicants and licensees. Space station applicants and licensees, however, rarely qualify under the definition of a small entity.
The NPRM proposes and seeks comment on several rule changes that would affect compliance requirements for space station operators. As noted above, these parties rarely qualify as small entities.
For example, we propose to allow additional uses of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, subject to compliance with technical limits designed to protect other users of the bands.
In total, the proposals and questions in the NPRM are designed to achieve the Commission's mandate to regulate in the public interest while imposing the lowest necessary burden on all affected parties, including small entities.
The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): “(1) the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rules for such small entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small entities.”
The NPRM seeks comment from all interested parties. The Commission is aware that some of the proposals under consideration may impact small entities. Small entities are encouraged to bring to the Commission's attention any specific concerns they may have with the proposals outlined in the NPRM.
The Commission expects to consider the economic impact on small entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the NPRM, in reaching its final conclusions and taking action in this proceeding.
In this NPRM, the Commission invites comment on adding an allocation in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to permit the use of the band by the Fixed-Satellite Service in the space-to-Earth direction, along with technical rules to prevent harmful interference between the FSS, DBS, and BSS. Overall, the proposals in the NPRM seek to increase the use of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band by satellite services while maintaining adequate protections against interference.
None.
Accordingly,
Radio, Table of frequency allocations.
Administrative practice and procedure, Earth stations, Satellites.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 2 and 25, as follows:
47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise noted.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
US402 In the band 17.3-17.7 GHz, existing Federal satellites and associated earth stations in the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) are authorized to operate on a primary basis in the frequency bands and areas listed below. Non-Federal receiving earth stations in the broadcasting-satellite and fixed-satellite services within the bands and areas listed below shall not claim protection from Federal earth stations in the fixed-satellite service.
(a) 17.600-17.700 GHz for stations within a 120 km radius of 38°49′ N latitude and 76°52′ W longitude.
(b) 17.375-17.475 GHz for stations within a 160 km radius of 39°42′ N latitude and 104°45′ W longitude.
NG58 In the band 17.3-17.8 GHz, the following provisions shall apply to the broadcasting-satellite and fixed-satellite services:
(a) The use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz by the broadcasting-satellite and fixed-satellite (space-to-Earth) services is limited to geostationary satellites.
(b) The use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band by the broadcasting-satellite service is limited to receiving earth stations located outside of the United States and its insular areas.
(c) The use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz by the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for broadcasting-satellite service.
(d) Earth stations in the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band shall not claim protection from stations in the fixed service that operate in that band.
47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 310, 319, 332, 605, and 721 unless otherwise noted.
(d) * * *
(7) Applicants for authorizations for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service, including applicants proposing feeder links for space stations operating in the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service, must also include the information specified in § 25.140(a). Applicants for authorizations for space stations in the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service or applicants seeking authorization for FSS space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band (space-to-Earth), must also include the information specified in § 25.140(b);
(15) Each applicant for a space station license in the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service or the FSS transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, shall include the following information as an attachment to its application:
(i) If the applicant proposes to operate in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, a demonstration that the proposed space station will comply with the applicable power flux density limits in § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) or (b)(3) unless the applicant provides a certification under paragraph (d)(15)(ii) of this section.
(ii) In cases where the proposed space station will not comply with the applicable power flux density limits set forth in § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) or (b)(3), the applicant will be required to provide a certification that all potentially affected parties acknowledge and do not object to the use of the applicant's higher power flux densities. The affected parties with whom the applicant must coordinate are those GSO 17/24 GHz BSS satellite networks or FSS satellite networks with space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that are located up to ±6° away. Excesses of more than 3 dB above the applicable power flux density levels specified in § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) or (b)(3), must also be coordinated with 17/24 GHz BSS satellite networks located up to ±10° away.
(iii) Any information required by § 25.264(a)(6), (b)(4), or (d).
(18) For space stations in the Direct Broadcast Satellite service, the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service, or FSS space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, maximum orbital eccentricity.
(e)
(2) Individual or blanket license applications may be filed for operation in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band; however, blanket licensed earth stations shall operate on an unprotected basis with respect to DBS feeder link earth stations. All receiving FSS earth stations shall operate on an unprotected basis with respect to the Fixed Service in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band.
(g) Applications for earth stations that will transmit to GSO space stations in any portion of the 5850-6725 MHz, 13.75-14.5 GHz, 24.75-25.25 GHz, 27.5-29.1 GHz, or 29.25-30.0 GHz bands must include, in addition to the particulars of operation identified on FCC Form 312 and associated Schedule B, the information specified in either paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section for each earth station antenna type.
(k)(1) Applicants for FSS earth stations that qualify for routine processing in the conventional or extended C-bands, the conventional or extended Ku-bands, the conventional or extended Ka-bands, or the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, including ESV applications
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (k)(1) of this section, an earth station that would receive signals in the 17.7-20.2 GHz band may not communicate with a space station on the Permitted Space Station List in that band until the space station operator has completed coordination under Footnote US334 to § 2.106 of this chapter.
(d) * * *
(2) * * *
(v) Any operator of a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, whose license is conditioned to operate at less than the power level otherwise permitted by § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) and/or (b)(3), and is conditioned to accept interference from a neighboring 17/24 GHz BSS space station, may file a modification application to remove those two conditions in the event that the license for that neighboring space station is cancelled or surrendered. In the event that two or more such modification applications are filed, and those applications are mutually exclusive, the modification applications will be considered on a first-come, first-served basis pursuant to the procedure set forth in § 25.158.
(a) * * *
(2) In addition to the information required by § 25.114, an applicant for GSO FSS space station operation, including applicants proposing feeder links for space stations operating in the 17/24 GHz BSS, that will be located at an orbital location less than two degrees from the assigned location of an authorized co-frequency GSO space station, must either certify that the proposed operation has been coordinated with the operator of the co-frequency space station or submit an interference analysis demonstrating the compatibility of the proposed system with the co-frequency space station. Such an analysis must include, for each type of radio frequency carrier, the link noise budget, modulation parameters, and overall link performance analysis. (See Appendices B and C to Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, FCC 83-184, and the following public notices, copies of which are available in the Commission's EDOCS database, available at
(3) * * *
(iii) With respect to proposed operation in the conventional or extended Ka-bands, a certification that the proposed space station will not generate power flux density at the Earth's surface in excess of the limits in paragraphs (a)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section, and that associated uplink operation will not exceed applicable EIRP density envelopes in § 25.218(i) unless the non-routine uplink and/or downlink operation is coordinated with operators of authorized co-frequency space stations at assigned locations within six degrees of the orbital location and except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section.
(A) −118 dBW/m
(B) For space-to-Earth FSS transmissions in the 17.3-18.8 GHz band in the region of the contiguous United States, located west of 100 West Longitude: −121 dBW/m
(b) * * *
(3) An applicant for a license to operate a 17/24 GHz BSS space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must certify that the downlink power flux density on the Earth's surface will not exceed the regional power flux density limits given in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, or must provide the certification specified in § 25.114(d)(15)(ii):
(i) In the region of the contiguous United States, located south of 38° North Latitude and east of 100° West Longitude: −115 dBW/m
(ii) In the region of the contiguous United States, located north of 38° North Latitude and east of 100° West Longitude: −118 dBW/m
(iii) In the region of the contiguous United States, located west of 100° West Longitude: −121 dBW/m
(iv) For all regions outside of the contiguous United States including Alaska and Hawaii: −115 dBW/m
(4) Except among applicants for FSS space-to-Earth transmissions in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, where the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section apply, a 17/24 GHz BSS or FSS applicant for a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to be located less than four degrees from a previously authorized or proposed space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, must either certify that the proposed operation has been coordinated with the operator of the co-frequency space station or provide an interference analysis of the kind described in paragraph (a) of this section, except that the applicant must demonstrate that its proposed network will not cause more interference to the adjacent space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band operating in compliance with the technical requirements of this part, than if the applicant were located at an orbital separation of four degrees from the previously licensed or proposed space station.
(5) In addition to the requirements of paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this section, the link budget for any satellite transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band (space-to-Earth) must take into account longitudinal station-keeping tolerances. Any applicant for a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that has reached a coordination agreement with an operator of another space station to allow that operator to exceed the pfd levels specified in § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) or (b)(3), must use those higher pfd levels for the purpose of this showing.
(d) An operator of a GSO FSS space station in the conventional or extended C-bands, conventional or extended Ku-bands, 24.75-25.25 GHz band (Earth-to-space), or conventional or extended Ka-bands may notify the Commission of its non-routine transmission levels and be relieved of the obligation to coordinate such levels with later applicants and petitioners.
(m) * * *
(1) * * *
(3) Each applicant for such new or modified feeder-link earth stations shall file with its application memoranda of coordination with each co-frequency licensee authorized to construct BSS receive earth stations or an individually licensed FSS receive earth station within the coordination zone. Feeder link earth station applicants are not required to complete coordination with blanket-licensed receiving FSS earth stations in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band.
(a) * * *
(1) In the plane tangent to the GSO arc, as defined in § 25.103, for earth stations not operating in the conventional Ku-band, the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, or the 27.5-30 GHz band:
(3) In the plane tangent to the GSO arc, for earth stations operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz or 27.5-30 GHz bands:
(4) In the plane perpendicular to the GSO arc, as defined in § 25.103, for earth stations not operating in the conventional Ku-band, the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, or the 27.5-30 GHz band:
(6) In the plane perpendicular to the GSO arc, for earth stations operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz or 27.5-30 GHz bands:
(b) * * *
(1) In the plane tangent to the GSO arc, for earth stations not operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz or 27.5-30 GHz bands:
(2) In the plane perpendicular to the GSO arc, for earth stations not operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz or 27.5-30 GHz bands:
(3) In the plane tangent to the GSO arc or in the plane perpendicular to the GSO arc, for earth stations operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz or 27.5-30 GHz bands:
(f) All space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service operating in any portion of the 3600-4200 MHz, 5091-5250 MHz, 5850-7025 MHz, 10.7-12.7 GHz, 12.75-13.25 GHz, 13.75-14.5 GHz, 15.43-15.63 GHz, 17.3-17.8 GHz (space-to-Earth), 18.3-20.2 GHz, 24.75-25.25 GHz, or 27.5-30.0 GHz bands, including feeder links for other space services, and in the Broadcasting-Satellite Service in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band (space-to-Earth), shall employ state-of-the-art full frequency reuse, either through the use of orthogonal polarizations within the same beam and/or the use of spatially independent beams. This requirement does not apply to telemetry, tracking, and command operation.
(e) An earth station may be routinely licensed for digital transmission in the conventional or extended Ka-bands if the input power spectral density into the antenna will not exceed 3.5 dBW/MHz and the application includes certification pursuant to § 25.132(a)(1) of conformance with the antenna gain performance requirements in § 25.209(a) and (b).
(h) Applications for authority for fixed earth station operation in the conventional C-band, the extended C-band, the conventional Ku-band, the extended Ku-band, the conventional Ka-band or the extended Ka-band that do not qualify for routine processing under relevant criteria in this § 25.211 or 25.218 are subject to the requirements in § 25.220.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
(a)
(b)
(i)
(j)
(a) The requirements in this section apply to applications for, and operation of, earth stations transmitting in the conventional or extended C-bands, the conventional or extended Ku-bands, or the conventional or extended Ka-bands that do not qualify for routine licensing under relevant criteria in §§ 25.211, 25.212, or 25.218.
(a) A 17/24 GHz BSS or FSS applicant seeking to transmit in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band may be authorized to operate a space station at levels up to the maximum power flux density limits defined below without coordinating its power flux density levels with adjacent licensed or permitted operators, as follows:
(i) For 17/24 GHz BSS applicants, up to the power flux density levels specified in § 25.140(b)(3) only if there is no licensed space station, or prior-filed application for a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band at a location less than four degrees from the orbital location at which the applicant proposes to operate; and
(ii) For FSS space station applicants transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, up to the maximum power flux density levels in § 25.140(a)(3)(iii), only if there is no licensed 17/24 GHz BSS space station, or prior-filed application for a 17/24 GHz BSS space station, at a location less than four degrees from the orbital location at which the FSS applicant proposes to operate, and there is no licensed FSS space station, or prior-filed application for an FSS space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, at a location less than two degrees from the orbital location at which the applicant proposes to operate.
(b) Any U.S. licensee or permittee authorized to transmit in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that does not comply with the applicable power flux-density limits set forth in §§ 25.140(a)(3)(iii) and/or 25.140(b)(3) shall bear the burden of coordinating with any future co-frequency licensees and permittees of a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band as required in § 25.114(d)(15)(ii).
(c) If no good faith agreement can be reached, the operator of the FSS space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that does not comply with § 25.140(a)(3)(iii) or the operator of the 17/24 GHz BSS space station that does not comply with § 25.140(b)(3), shall reduce its power flux-density levels to be compliant with those specified in §§ 25.140(a)(3)(iii) and/or 25.140(b)(3) as appropriate.
(d) Any U.S. licensee or permittee of a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that is required to provide information in its application pursuant to § 25.140(a)(2) or (b)(4) must accept any increased interference that may result from adjacent space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that are operating in compliance with the rules for such space stations specified in §§ 25.140(a) and (b), 25.202(a)(9), and (e) through (g), 25.210(i) through (j), 25.224, 25.262, 25.264(h), and 25.273(a)(3).
(e) Notwithstanding the provisions of this sections, licensees and permittees will be allowed to apply for a license or authorization for a replacement satellite that will be operated at the same power level and interference protection as the satellite to be replaced.
(a) Each applicant or licensee for a space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must submit a series of tables or graphs containing predicted off-axis gain data for each antenna that will transmit in any portion of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band, in accordance with the following specifications. Using a Cartesian coordinate system wherein the X axis is tangent to the geostationary orbital arc with the positive direction pointing east,
(1) In the X-Z plane,
(2) In planes rotated from the X-Z plane about the Z axis, over a range of ±20 degrees relative to the equatorial plane, in increments of 10 degrees or less.
(6) The predictive gain information must be submitted to the Commission for each license application that is filed for a space station transmitting in any portion of the 17.3-18.8 GHz band no later than two years after license grant for the space station.
(b) A space station applicant or licensee transmitting in any portion of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must submit power flux density (pfd) calculations based on the predicted gain data submitted in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, as follows:
(1) * * *
(2) The calculations must take into account the aggregate pfd levels at the DBS receiver at each measurement frequency arising from all antenna beams on the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. They must also take into account the maximum permitted longitudinal station-keeping tolerance, orbital inclination and orbital eccentricity of both the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band and DBS space stations, and must:
(i) * * *
(ii) Indicate the extent to which the calculated pfd of the space station's transmissions in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band exceed the threshold pfd level of −117 dBW/m2/100 kHz at those prior-filed U.S. DBS space station locations.
(3) If the calculated pfd exceeds the threshold level of −117 dBW/m2/100 kHz at the location of any prior-filed U.S. DBS space station, the applicant or licensee must also provide with the pfd calculations a certification that all affected DBS operators acknowledge and do not object to such higher off-axis pfd levels. No such certification is required in cases where the frequencies assigned to the DBS and to the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band do not overlap.
(4) The information and any certification required by paragraph (b) of this section must be submitted to the Commission for each license application
(c) No later than two months prior to launch, each licensee of a space station transmitting in any portion of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must update the predicted transmitting antenna off-axis gain information provided in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section by submitting measured transmitting antenna off-axis gain information over the angular ranges, measurement frequencies and polarizations specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section. The transmitting antenna off-axis gain information should be measured under conditions as close to flight configuration as possible.
(d) No later than two months prior to launch, or when applying for authority to change the location of a space station transmitting in any portion of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band that is already in orbit, each such space station licensee must provide pfd calculations based on the measured off-axis gain data submitted in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section, as follows:
(1) * * *
(ii) At the location of any subsequently filed U.S. DBS space station where the pfd level in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band calculated on the basis of measured gain data exceeds −117 dBW/m
(2) The pfd calculations must take into account the maximum permitted longitudinal station-keeping tolerance, orbital inclination and orbital eccentricity of both the transmitting 17.3-17.8 GHz and DBS space stations, and must:
(e) If the aggregate pfd level calculated from the measured data submitted in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section is in excess of the threshold pfd level of −117 dBW/m2/100 kHz:
(1) At the location of any prior-filed U.S. DBS space station as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, then the operator of the space station transmitting in any portion of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must either:
(2) At the location of any subsequently filed U.S. DBS space station as defined in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, where the aggregate pfd level submitted in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section is also in excess of the pfd level calculated on the basis of the predicted data submitted in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section that were on file with the Commission at the time the DBS space station application was filed, then the operator of the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must either:
(3) No coordination or adjustment of operating parameters is required in cases where there is no overlap in frequencies assigned to the DBS and the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GH band.
(f) The applicant or licensee for the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must modify its license, or amend its application, as appropriate, based upon new information:
(1) * * *
(2) If the operator of the space station transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band adjusts its operating parameters in accordance with paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) or (e)(2)(ii) or this section.
(g) Absent an explicit agreement between operators to permit more closely spaced operations, U.S. authorized 17/24 GHz BSS or FSS space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band and U.S. authorized DBS space stations with co-frequency assignments may not be licensed to operate at locations separated by less than 0.5 degrees in orbital longitude.
(h) All operational space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band must be maintained in geostationary orbits that:
(i) U.S. authorized DBS networks may claim protection from space path interference arising from the reverse-band operations of U.S. authorized space stations transmitting in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to the extent that the DBS space station operates within the bounds of inclination and eccentricity listed below. When the geostationary orbit of the DBS space station exceeds these bounds on inclination and eccentricity, it may not claim protection from any additional space path interference arising as a result of its inclined or eccentric operations and may only claim protection as if it were operating within the bounds listed below:
Federal Communications Commission.
Proposed rule.
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) proposes to amend the mandatory minimum standards applicable to internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service (IP CTS) and Captioned Telephone Service (CTS) to include metrics for accuracy and caption delay and to define how testing and measurement of IP CTS and CTS provider performance should be conducted.
Comments are due March 3, 2021; reply comments are due April 2, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by CG Docket Nos. 13-24, 03-123, and 10-51, by either of the following methods:
•
•
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see document FCC 20-132 at
William Wallace, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, FCC, at 202-418-2716, or
This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Further Notice), document FCC 20-132, adopted on September 30, 2020, released on October 2, 2020, in CG Docket Nos. 13-24, 03-123, and 10-51. The Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration in document FCC 20-132 was published at 85 FR 64971, October 14, 2020. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to
This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
The Further Notice in document FCC 20-132 seeks comment on proposed rule amendments that may result in modified information collection requirements. If the Commission adopts any modified information collection requirements, the Commission will publish another document in the
1. The Commission seeks comment on proposed rules to enable the Commission to better evaluate the efficacy of the IP CTS and CTS programs and the performance of individual service providers. The Commission proposes to amend its rules to provide for robust, efficient, objective, and quantifiable measurement of the quality of service offered by each CTS and IP CTS provider and by the telephone caption service program as a whole. The Commission's objective is to adopt minimum performance standards that will allow it to evaluate progress toward achieving the Congressional objectives set forth in section 225 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act). 47 U.S.C. 225.
2. IP CTS is a form of Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) that permits an individual who can speak but who has difficulty hearing over the telephone to use a telephone and an internet Protocol-enabled device via the internet to simultaneously listen to the other party and read captions of what the other party is saying. CTS is another form of telephone captioning, offered through state TRS programs, that functions similarly to IP CTS but without using the internet for the delivery of captions.
3. The Commission proposes to amend the minimum TRS standards applicable to CTS and IP CTS to provide quantifiable, measurable benchmarks for caption delay and accuracy. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should modify any other minimum TRS standards to provide more specific service-quality standards for CTS and IP CTS. The Commission also proposes to amend its rules to define how testing and measurement should be conducted to gauge provider performance in relation to these standards and to measure progress by the telephone caption service program as a whole toward achieving the statutory goals in section 225 of the Act. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether such performance assessment is best carried out by the Commission, by individual providers, or by an entity selected and overseen by all providers. More generally, the Commission seeks comment on whether these proposals will advance the relevant statutory objectives in section 225 of the Act, or “performance goals”—technological currency and efficiency, and the overarching statutory goal of “functional equivalence.” What types of measurements are needed to ensure that service quality for telephone caption services is not only functionally equivalent but technologically current, and does not impede the development of improved technology?
4. The Commission invites commenters to propose performance-measurement alternatives that would advance the statutory goals and objectives, and the Commission seeks comment on the costs and benefits of its proposal and any alternatives. For example, would quantifiable, measurable benchmarks for caption delay and accuracy—or methods for measuring performance against such benchmarks—be more effectively and efficiently developed by a voluntary, consensus standards organization? If so, which standards-setting organization would be appropriate for developing such benchmarks and methods? What steps would be needed to ensure all stakeholders are able to participate effectively? How could a consensus process be managed so as not to unduly
5.
Caption delay is the difference in time (in seconds) between when a word can be heard in the audio and when that word appears in the stream of captions on the caption user's primary display.
6. Caption delay may vary over the course of a call. The Commission proposes that testing procedures should ensure that caption delay measurements for any service include measurements taken from various segments in the duration of captioned calls. The Commission seeks comment on the above proposals and their costs and benefits. Should caption delays during a single test call be averaged together, with each test call given a score, and the score for each test call given equal weight in the overall average? Or should caption delay be averaged on some other basis,
7. The Commission seeks comment on setting the applicable metric,
8.
9. For purposes of measuring compliance with the standard, the Commission seeks comment on the following definition of Word Error Rate:
The Word Error Rate for a captioned telephone conversation is (i) the number of word substitutions, omissions, and insertions in the captions divided by (ii) the total number of words in the voice communications being captioned. Accuracy shall be assessed for a caption as delivered to the caption user's device within the minimum TRS standard for caption delay. A substitution error occurs when a spoken word is replaced with another word, an omission error involves the omission of a spoken word, and an insertion error consists of the addition of a word that has not been spoken.
10. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal and its costs and benefits. To implement this definition of Word Error Rate, should the Commission define what constitutes a “word”? For example, should interjected sounds such as “umm” and “ah” or garbled speech count as words? If a speaker uses a regional dialect or foreign phrase that has no standard English spelling, can there be an error in transcription? The Commission also seeks comment on whether to insert a qualifier in the above definition to limit the word errors that are counted to “major errors,” which a group of IP CTS providers define as errors that significantly alter, obscure, or reverse the meaning of the original speech. Does this definition provide a consistent, repeatable determination of what constitutes a “major” error, and if not, can it be modified to do so? Would limiting counted errors to major errors produce materially different results in the overall assessment of CTS and IP CTS providers? More specifically, would any improvements from counting only major errors be sufficient to justify (1) the additional costs and burdens involved in classifying errors as major or minor and (2) the greater likelihood of disputes over which errors count as major errors?
11. Alternatively, if a distinction is needed between major and minor errors, should “minor errors” (
12. Should readability (a concept that includes correct capitalization and punctuation) be included in the Word Error Rate standard, and if so, how should it be measured?
13. The Commission also seeks comment on the maximum Word Error Rate that should be specified for caption service in the FCC's minimum TRS standards, and how this standard should apply to variable call conditions. Should the Commission set the accuracy standard based on the expectations of users and the impact of inaccuracies on a user's ability to carry on a natural telephone conversation, and if so, how should these be determined? Alternatively, in order to set an initial standard as expeditiously as possible, should the Commission initially set the maximum permitted Word Error Rate based on the current performance of IP CTS providers, and subsequently reset the standard based on measures of user expectations and understanding? If a current-performance-based approach is initially used, should the maximum level be set based on the Word Error Rate achieved by the average provider, or at some other defined value on the spectrum of baseline accuracy measurements? Should a different standard be applied to calls with poor audio quality? How would such a determination be made?
14.
15. The Commission seeks comment on whether to strengthen the applicable speed-of-answer standard for telephone captions. With fully automatic captioning, for example, an IP CTS provider can begin delivering captioning almost instantaneously upon receiving notice that a registered user is making a call for which captioning is desired. Would it be reasonable to require all providers to meet a standard that approximates what is feasible with fully automatic captioning? For example, even though a provider may find it desirable, for other reasons, to continue using CAs for some or most calls, could fully automatic captioning be used as a stopgap measure for calls for which a CA is not immediately available?
16.
17. The Commission seeks further comment on whether its minimum TRS standards should be modified to provide more specific and quantified performance standards for service outages and for dropped or disconnected calls. If the Commission adopts such standards, how should they be measured and what should be the minimum metric for compliance?
18. Should the Commission direct the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau to conduct rulemakings or otherwise determine more granular metrics for caption delay, accuracy, or other TRS standards?
19. The Commission proposes that the methodologies used to assess provider performance shall produce objective, quantifiable, repeatable, and verifiable service quality measurements. The Commission also proposes that such methodologies be technologically neutral and not designed to favor any particular service provider. However, to the extent a provider's service is designed to work only with a particular device (such as a proprietary phone or a smartphone), the Commission proposes that the provider's service be tested when used with that device.
20. The Commission proposes the following additional guidelines for service quality testing:
(1) Sample size (
(2) Test calls should mimic the proper use of the service (
(3) Test calls should follow the structure of a natural telephone conversation;
(4) Test calls should not be detectable as “test calls” by CAs (
(5) Testing should be designed to evaluate service performance over a range of telephone audio conditions
21. The Commission also seeks comment on the specifics of how tests and measurements for caption delay and accuracy should be conducted, and how the Commission can best ensure that such methods and procedures are transparent. Should the Commission specify the sample size and frequency of such testing, and if so, how? To what extent can document scoring, technical parameters, recording conditions, or other parameters affect test values, and what guidance should the FCC's rules provide regarding these matters? Should the Commission direct the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau to conduct rulemakings or otherwise make more granular determinations on how to conduct performance testing and measurement in relation to caption delay, accuracy, or other TRS standards? Alternatively, should test methods be subject to a peer review process?
22. The Commission also seeks comment on what specific consequences should result if testing shows that a provider is failing to meet the minimum standard for caption delay or accuracy. If test results conducted in accordance with applicable methodological guidelines indicate that a provider is not meeting the Commission's minimum standard for caption delay or accuracy, should the service be retested on a weekly basis, with compensation withheld until such time as testing shows the problem with caption delay or accuracy has been fixed? Alternatively, should the provider be given some period of time to rectify the problem, with withholding to begin if the problem cannot be rectified within that time period? Should the Commission formalize a compliance ladder approach, similar to the one used for closed captioning quality problems, which would be triggered whenever testing shows that a provider did not meet an applicable service quality standard?
23. The Commission tentatively concludes that to obtain authoritative assessments of IP CTS providers' performance in relation to caption delay and caption accuracy, it would not be practicable to rely on provider self-measurement and reporting (
24. The Commission also seeks comment on whether authoritative testing and measurement of caption delay and accuracy would be most effectively and reliably performed by the Commission or by an entity selected and supervised by the providers themselves, through some type of joint undertaking. Could a provider-sponsored entity conduct such assessments in a manner that is objective and unbiased? How should the Commission ensure that such an entity remains unbiased and independent of improper influence by any TRS provider or group of providers?
25. The Commission seeks comment on whether an entity designated to conduct performance testing should be authorized to conduct testing and measurement in additional areas other than caption delay and accuracy. To
26. The Commission proposes that the results of testing and measurement of CTS and IP CTS providers' performance, both in the aggregate and for individual providers, be made available to the public on a regular basis, in reports on the Commission's website. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal and the frequency of such reports. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on the specificity of the results to be posted. Should the results only indicate whether each individual provider met the tested or measured minimum standard? Should the performance results for service quality standards other than caption delay and accuracy be reported? Should the performance results be reported in a way that allows consumers to compare providers' results? Should the reports include a rank or score for the provider's performance results? The Commission also seeks comment on whether to test and measure performance of publicly available captioning services for voice calls offered by entities that do not provide CTS or IP CTS and make such results available to the public in the CTS and IP CTS performance reports.
27. The Commission seeks comment on whether to mandate a system or procedure for CTS and IP CTS users to rate the quality and performance of captioning services, on a call-by-call or other appropriate basis, with publication of average ratings for each provider, and how such a system or procedure can be most effectively implemented and overseen. Would a five-star rating system provide sufficient granularity for meaningful user ratings of IP CTS providers? Should the rating system have more specific quality or usability ratings, such as on a scale of one to ten? For those users who choose to rate their TRS calls, should the Commission allow them the choice to identify themselves or should the ratings be strictly anonymous?
28. If testing of providers is conducted by a third party, how should the Commission ensure that providers (and their ASR technologies) respond to test calls as they would to any call,
29. The Commission seeks comment on the above proposals and their costs and benefits, and the beliefs and assumptions stated above.
30. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the Further Notice. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadline for comments on the Further Notice specified in the
31. In the Further Notice, the Commission proposes to amend its rules to provide for robust, efficient, objective, and quantifiable measurement of the quality of service offered by CTS and IP CTS providers. This measurement program will enable the Commission to better evaluate the efficacy of the IP CTS and CTS programs and the performance of individual service providers in relation to the statutory goals of functional equivalence, technological currency, and efficiency.
32. The authority for this proposed rulemaking is contained in sections 1, 2, and 225 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
33. The rules proposed in document FCC 20-132 will affect the obligations of CTS and IP CTS providers. These services can be included within the broad economic category of All Other Telecommunications.
34. All CTS and IP CTS providers would be required to meet or exceed any quantitative performance standards adopted by the Commission for caption delay, accuracy, or other aspects of provider performance. Because the Commission tentatively concludes that provider self-measurement and reporting is not a practicable approach to assessing caption delay and accuracy, no specific reporting or recordkeeping requirements are proposed. However, the Commission asks whether providers should be required to submit user devices, software, and other material or information needed for testing, as well as provider-generated testing protocols and results, upon request, if the Commission authorizes a third-party entity to conduct the testing and measurement. Such requirements, if adopted, may involve some additional recordkeeping and reporting.
35. Only CTS and IP CTS providers certified to receive compensation from the TRS Fund would be subject to the testing and measurement requirements, if the rules are adopted. The Commission's proposals limit unnecessary regulation of small entities by focusing on assessment of caption delay and caption accuracy—the two metrics that interested parties generally designate as most important to captioning service quality. Opting some providers out of the program or limiting the extent of testing for some providers is not proposed because it would prevent the availability of comprehensive performance information to the Commission and consumers.
36. The Further Notice seeks comment from all interested parties. Small entities are encouraged to bring to the Commission's attention any specific concerns they may have with the proposals outlined in the Further Notice. The Commission expects to consider the economic impact on small entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the Further Notice, in
37. None.
Individuals with disabilities, Telecommunications, Telephones.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 201, 202, 217, 218, 220, 222, 225, 226, 227, 227b, 228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 262, 276, 403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 1401-1473, unless otherwise noted; Pub. L. 115-141, Div. P, sec. 503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091.
(a) * * *
(4)
(i)
(ii)
(A) The number of word substitutions, omissions, and insertions in the captions divided by;
(B) The total number of words in the voice communications being captioned. Accuracy shall be assessed for a caption as delivered to the caption user's device within the minimum TRS standard for caption delay. A substitution error occurs when a spoken word is replaced with another word, an omission error involves the omission of a spoken word, and an insertion error consists of the addition of a word that has not been spoken. The average Word Error Rate shall be no more than [XX.X%].
(iii)
(B) Test calls should mimic the proper use of the service.
(C) Test calls should follow the structure of a natural telephone conversation.
(D) Test calls should not be detectable as “test calls” by CAs.
(E) Testing should be designed to evaluate service performance over a range of telephone audio conditions, accents, and dialects that are likely to be encountered by CTS and IP CTS users.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notification of public hearings.
We, NMFS, will hold three public hearings on both our January 8, 2021, revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the threatened Arctic subspecies of the ringed seal (
Public hearing conference calls will be held, convening at 4 p.m. and concluding no later than 7 p.m. Alaska Standard Time (AKST), on each of the following dates: February 23, 2021 (Yukon-Kuskokwim and southwest Alaska); February 24, 2021 (Northwest Arctic Borough and northern Bering Sea); and February 25, 2021 (North Slope Borough). NMFS may close the hearings 15 minutes after the conclusion of public testimony and after responding to any clarifying questions from hearing participants about the proposed critical habitat designations. For each hearing, we encourage participation by members of the public wishing to provide oral comments specific to the regions indicated parenthetically. However, all hearings are open to all interested parties and at each hearing we will accept testimony regarding any area or aspect of the proposed critical habitat designations. Written comments must be received by March 9, 2021.
The public hearings will be held by conference calls rather than at physical locations. Conference call information for all three hearings is the same: Telephone: (800) 201-3962, Conference Code: 651174.
You may submit written data, information, or comments regarding the revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Arctic ringed seal, identified by Docket ID NOAA-NMFS-2013-0114, and the proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Beringia DPS of the bearded seal, identified by Docket ID NOAA-NMFS-2020-0029, by either of the following methods:
•
•
The proposed rules and supporting documents are available in the dockets for the proposed rules at
Tammy Olson, NMFS Alaska Region, (907) 271-2373; or Jon Kurland, NMFS Alaska Region, (907) 586-7638.
On January 8, 2021, NMFS published a revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the threatened Arctic ringed seal (86 FR 1452) and a proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the threatened Beringia DPS of the bearded seal (86 FR 1433) under the ESA. Each proposed designation comprises an area of marine habitat in the northern Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort seas. A particular area north of the Beaufort Sea shelf is proposed for exclusion from the proposed designation for the Arctic ringed seal based on national security impacts. The proposed rules opened a public comment period for each of the proposed designations through March 9, 2021, and announced that public hearings would be held in Alaska.
We will hold three public hearing conference calls to accept oral comments on both our revised proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Arctic ringed seal and our proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Beringia DPS of the bearded seal on the dates and at the times listed above (see
During each public hearing, NMFS will provide a brief opening presentation on the proposed critical habitat designations before accepting public testimony for the record. The hearings will be recorded for the purpose of preparing transcripts of oral comments received. Attendees will be asked to identify themselves before joining the hearing. Once connected to the call, telephone lines will be automatically muted. During the public testimony portion of the hearing, to indicate that you would like to offer a comment, press 5*. When it is your turn to offer your comment, the moderator will unmute your individual line. Commenters will be asked to indicate their full name and the identity of any organization on whose behalf they may be speaking. In the event that attendance at the public hearings is large, the time allotted for each commenter may be limited.
Anyone wishing to make an oral statement at the public hearing is encouraged to also submit a written copy of their statement to us during the comment period by either of the methods identified above (see
These public hearings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. People needing reasonable accommodations to participate in these hearings should submit a request as soon as possible, and no later than 10 business days before the accommodation is needed, by contacting Tammy Olson (see
16 U.S.C. 1531
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Saguache—Upper Rio Grande Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a virtual meeting. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with the Act. RAC information can be found at the following website:
The meeting will be held on Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 8:30 a.m. Mountain Standard Time.
All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under
The meeting will be held with virtual attendance only. For virtual meeting information, please see the website listed under
Written comments may be submitted as described under
Gregg Goodland, RAC Coordinator by phone at 719-588-7045 or via email at
Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
The purpose of the meeting is to:
1. Review RAC funding, roles, responsibilities, and operating guidelines;
2. Allow public input on project proposals;
3. Allow time for project proposal presentations;
4. Discuss, recommend, and approve new Title II projects;
5. Discuss possible future meetings and next steps.
The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by Friday, February 19, 2021 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Gregg Goodland, RAC Coordinator, 1803 W Highway 160, Monte Vista, CO 81144; by email to
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Ketchikan Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a virtual meeting. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with Title II of the Act.
The meeting will be held on February 25, 2021, at 6:00 p.m. (Alaska Standard Time).
All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under
The meeting will be held virtual only. A conference line is set up for those who would like to listen in by telephone. For the conference call number, please contact the person listed under
Written comments may be submitted as described under
Penny L. Richardson, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 907-228-4105 (office) or 907-419-5300 (cell), or via email at
Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
The purpose of the meeting is to:
1. Update members on past RAC projects, and
2. Propose new RAC projects.
The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by February 22, 2021 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Penny L. Richardson, RAC Coordinator, Ketchikan Misty Fjords Ranger District, 3031 Tongass Avenue, Ketchikan, Alaska 99901; by email to
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Southern Montana Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a virtual meeting. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with Title II of the Act; and to make recommendations on recreation fee proposals for sites consistent with the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act. RAC information can be found at the following website:
The meeting will be held on February 16, 2021, at 3:00 p.m., Mountain Standard Time.
All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of the meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under
The meeting will be held virtually via telephone and/or video conference. For virtual meeting information, please contact the person listed under
Written comments may be submitted as described under
Kathy Minor, Deputy Forest Supervisor, by phone at 406-587-6776 or via email at
Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
The purpose of the meeting is to:
1.
2. Discuss and make recommendations on recreation fee proposals for sites located on the Custer Gallatin National Forest.
The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments must be sent to Kathy Minor, Deputy Forest Supervisor, Custer Gallatin National Forest Supervisor's Office, 10 East Babcock Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715; by email to
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a teleconference meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Friday, February 12, 2021. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss their report outline and discuss drafting a statement of concern regarding the attempted government coup.
The meeting will be held on Friday, February 12, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. PT.
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-367-2403, conference ID number: 7999183. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of public meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that the Maine State Advisory Committee to the Commission will hold a virtual meeting on Thursday, February 18, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. (ET) for the purpose of discussing next steps for its digital equity project.
February 18, 2021, Thursday, at 12:00 p.m. (ET):
•
• To join by phone only, dial 1-800-360-9505; Access code: 199 929 4603.
Barbara de La Viez at
This meeting is available to the public through the Webex link above. If joining only via phone, callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind and 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 call-in number found through registering at the web link provided for this meeting.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Barbara de La Viez at
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a teleconference meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. (Pacific Time) Friday, March 26, 2021. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the first draft of their report on pretrial detention, release, and bail practices.
The meeting will be held on Friday, March 26, 2021 from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. PT.
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-367-2403, conference ID number: 3131363. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012 or email Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of web hearing.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will hold a web hearing from 12:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (PST) on Wednesday, March 3, 2021. The purpose of the hearing is to hear testimony examining equity in education through distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among students in K-16 schools with disabilities and students of color. This is a first in a series of web hearings focused on this topic. Meeting materials and presentations will be available before and after the event at
Wednesday, March 3, 2021 from 12:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (PST)
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-360-9505, Access code: 199 761 5903. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012 or email Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a teleconference meeting of the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (Pacific Time) Wednesday, February 17, 2021. The purpose of the meeting will be to continue planning for web hearing focused on distance learning and equity in education.
The meeting will be held on Wednesday, February 17, 2021 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. PT
Ana Victoria Fortes (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 1-800-353-6461, conference ID number: 4251062. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012 or email Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at
Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of web hearing.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will hold a web hearing from 12:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (PST) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021. The purpose of the hearing is to hear testimony examining equity in education through distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among students in K-16 schools with disabilities and students of color. This the second in a series of web hearings focused on this topic. Meeting materials and presentations will be available before and after the event at
Wednesday, March 31, 2021 from 12:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (PST).
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-360-9505, Access code: 199 068 5392. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012 or email Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
On October 31, 2020, the Department of Commerce received clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to conduct the Household Pulse Survey (OMB No. 0607-1013, Exp. 10/31/23). The Household Pulse Survey was designed to meet a need for timely information associated with household experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The Department is committed to ensuring that the data collected by the Household Pulse Survey continue to meet information needs as they may evolve over the course of the pandemic. This notice serves to inform of the Department's intent to request clearance from OMB to make some revisions to the Household Pulse Survey questionnaire. To ensure public burden is not increased, the revisions would reflect the removal of questions for which utility has declined over time, and the addition of topics based on public comment previously received and in consult with other Federal agencies. New questions would relate to disability, child health access, telehealth and childcare. In addition, given the time-critical circumstances, questions on intention to receive the Covid-19 vaccine were added via a request approved by OMB on December 30, 2020 to coincide with the availability of vaccines; questions previously approved by OMB relating to the economic stimulus payments were also released into production once payments began to be issued.
It is the Department's intention to commence data collection using the revised instrument on or about March 1, 2021. The Department invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. Public comments were previously sought on the Household Pulse Survey via the
The Household Pulse Survey was initially launched in April, 2020 as an experimental project (see
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
On April 27, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, Issam Hamade (“Hamade”), was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. 371. Specifically, Hamade was convicted of conspiring to export parts and technology from the United States to Lebanon, and specifically to Hizballah, for among other purposes, inclusion in unmanned aerial vehicles, without obtaining the required export licenses under the Export Administration Regulations or under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Hamade was sentenced to time served and a $100 special assessment.
Pursuant to Section 1760(e) of the Export Control Reform Act (“ECRA”),
BIS received notice of Hamade's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 371, and has provided notice and opportunity for Hamade to make a written submission to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR” or the “Regulations”). 15 CFR 766.25.
Based upon my review of the record and consultations with BIS's Office of Exporter Services, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny Hamade's export privileges under the Regulations for a period of 10 years from the date of Hamade's conviction. I have also decided to revoke any BIS-issued licenses in which Hamade had an interest at the time of his conviction.
Accordingly, it is hereby
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license exception, or export control document;
B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or engaging in any other activity subject to the Regulations; or
C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or from any other activity subject to the Regulations.
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the Regulations;
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;
C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the Regulations that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the Regulations with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing.
First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet Authority), National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), U.S. Department of Commerce.
Announcement of meeting.
The FirstNet Authority Board will convene an open public meeting of the Board and Board Committees.
February 10, 2021; 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST); WebEx.
The public meeting will be conducted via WebEx. Members of the public may listen to the meeting and view the slide presentation by visiting the URL:
BMW Manufacturing Company, LLC (BMW MC) submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on January 21, 2021.
BMW MC already has authority to produce gasoline and diesel-powered motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies, stamped body parts, and lithium ion batteries within Subzone 38A. The current request would add a foreign-status component to the scope of
Production under FTZ procedures could exempt BMW MC from customs duty payments on the foreign-status component used in export production. On its domestic sales, for the foreign-status component noted below, BMW MC would be able to choose the duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to passenger motor vehicles (duty rate 2.5%). BMW MC would be able to avoid duty on foreign-status components which become scrap/waste. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment.
The component sourced from abroad is electronic toll collection systems (duty-free). The request indicates that electronic toll collection systems are subject to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Section 301), depending on the country of origin. The applicable Section 301 decisions require subject merchandise to be admitted to FTZs in privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41).
Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary and sent to:
A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's website, which is accessible via
For further information, contact Christopher Wedderburn at
The FTZ Board (the Board) is currently reviewing an application for production authority within FTZ 38 on behalf of Teijin Carbon Fibers, Inc. (TCF) in Greenwood, South Carolina, submitted by the South Carolina State Ports Authority. On December 17, 2020, the Board published a notice inviting public comment on TCF's submission dated November 10, 2020 (see 85 FR 81875, December 17, 2020). In that notice, the Board allowed for submission of comments until January 19, 2021, and for submission of rebuttal comments until February 1, 2021. In response to a request from TCF, the Board is now extending the current period for submission of rebuttal comments until February 16, 2021. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary and sent to:
For further information, contact Diane Finver at
On April 30, 2019, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Irma Lizette Trevizo (“Trevizo”), was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. 371. Specifically, Trevizo was convicted of knowingly and willfully conspiring to smuggle firearms and ammunition from the United States to Mexico. Trevizo was sentenced to 24 months in prison, supervised release for two years and a $100 special assessment.
Pursuant to Section 1760(e) of the Export Control Reform Act (“ECRA”),
BIS received notice of Trevizo's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 371, and has provided notice and opportunity for Trevizo to make a written submission to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR” or the “Regulations”). 15 CFR 766.25.
Based upon my review of the record and consultations with BIS's Office of Exporter Services, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny Trevizo's export privileges under the Regulations for a period of 10 years from the date of Trevizo's conviction. I have also decided to revoke any BIS-issued licenses in which Trevizo had an interest at the time of her conviction.
Accordingly, it is hereby
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license exception, or export control document;
B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering,
C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or from any other activity subject to the Regulations.
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the Regulations;
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;
C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the Regulations that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the Regulations with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing.
United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice of new date/time for public meeting, previously scheduled for February 10, 2021, 3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. EST.
The International Trade Administration is announcing a new date/time for the United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board (Board or TTAB) meeting; the meeting is now scheduled for February 26, 2021. Please note that this meeting was originally scheduled for Wednesday, February 10, 2021, notice of which was published in the
Friday, February 26, 2021, 3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. EST. The deadline for members of the public to register, including requests to make comments during the meeting and for auxiliary aids, or to submit written comments for dissemination prior to the meeting, is 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, February 19, 2021.
The meeting will be held virtually. The access information will be provided by email to registrants.
Requests to register (including to speak or for auxiliary aids) and any written comments should be submitted by email to
Jennifer Aguinaga, the United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, National Travel and Tourism Office, U.S. Department of Commerce; telephone: 202-482-2404; email:
In addition, any member of the public may submit pertinent written comments concerning the Board's affairs at any time before or after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to Jennifer Aguinaga at the contact information indicated above. To be considered during the meeting, comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, February 19, 2021, to ensure transmission to the Board prior to the
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from Thailand for the period August 5, 2019, through September 30, 2020, based on the timely withdrawal of the request for review.
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Brian Smith or Alexis Cherry, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-1766 or (202) 482-0607, respectively.
On October 1, 2020, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from Thailand for the period August 5, 2019, through September 30, 2020.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party that requested the review withdraws its request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, the petitioner timely withdrew its review request by the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from Thailand for the period August 5, 2019, through September 30, 2020, in its entirety.
Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of glycine from Thailand at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period August 5, 2019, through September 30, 2020, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of this rescission notice in the
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 Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a 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). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
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 March 2021 and will appear in that month's
Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Review are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The
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.
This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that imports of seamless refined copper pipe and tube (copper pipe and tube) from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2019, through March 31, 2020. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Ariela Garvett, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3609.
This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce published the notice of initiation of this LTFV investigation on August 4, 2020.
The products covered by this investigation are copper pipe and tube from Vietnam. For a full description of the scope of this investigation,
In accordance with the preamble to Commerce's regulations,
Commerce is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Commerce has calculated export prices in accordance
In accordance with sections 733(e)(1)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.206, Commerce preliminary finds that critical circumstances do not exist for Hailiang (Vietnam) Copper Manufacturing Company Limited/Hongkong Hailiang Metal Trading Limited, for the non-individually investigated companies qualifying for a separate rate, and for the Vietnam-wide entity. For a full description of the methodology and results of Commerce's critical circumstances analysis,
In the
Commerce preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POI:
In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise, as described in Appendix I, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the
Commerce intends to disclose its calculations and analysis performed to interested parties in this preliminary determination within five days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, Commerce intends to verify the information relied upon in making its final determination. Normally, Commerce verifies information using standard procedures, including an on-site examination of original accounting, financial, and sales documentation. However, due to current travel restrictions in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, Commerce is unable to conduct on-site verification in this investigation. Accordingly, we intend to verify the information relied upon in making the final determination through alternative means in lieu of an on-site verification.
Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. A timeline for the submission of case briefs and written comments on non-scope issues will be announced at a later date. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than seven days after the deadline for case briefs.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, Commerce will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its preliminary determination. If the final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the final determination whether these imports materially injure, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.205(c).
The products covered by this investigation are all seamless circular refined copper pipes and tubes, including redraw hollows, greater than or equal to 6 inches (152.4 mm) in actual length and measuring less than 12.130 inches (308.102 mm) in actual outside diameter (OD), regardless of wall thickness, bore (
The scope of this investigation covers, but is not limited to, seamless refined copper pipe and tube produced or comparable to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) ASTM-B42, ASTM-B68, ASTM-B75, ASTM-B88, ASTM-B88M, ASTM-B188, ASTM-B251, ASTM-B251M, ASTM-B280, ASTM-B302, ASTM-B306, ASTM-B359, ASTM-B743, ASTM-B819, and ASTM-B903 specifications and meeting the physical parameters described therein.
Also included within the scope of this investigation are all sets of covered products, including “line sets” of seamless refined copper tubes (with or without fittings or insulation) suitable for connecting an outdoor air conditioner or heat pump to an indoor evaporator unit. The phrase “all sets of covered products” denotes any combination of items put up for sale that is comprised of merchandise subject to the scope.
“Refined copper” is defined as: (1) Metal containing at least 99.85 percent by actual weight of copper; or (2) metal containing at least 97.5 percent by actual weight of copper, provided that the content by actual weight of any other element does not exceed the following limits:
Excluded from the scope of this investigation are all seamless circular hollows of refined copper less than 12 inches in actual length whose actual OD exceeds its actual length.
The products subject to this investigation are currently classifiable under subheadings 7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to the investigation may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding, in part, the antidumping duty administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Italy for the period July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020.
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Jonathan Hall-Eastman or John Hoffner, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1468 or (202) 482-3315, respectively.
On July 1, 2020, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Italy.
On December 2, 2020, Rummo timely withdrew its request to review Rummo and its subsidiary Pasta Castiglioni.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The aforementioned withdrawal request was timely submitted and no other interested party requested an administrative review of Rummo and Pasta Castiglioni. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), and consistent with our practice,
The review will continue with respect to the following companies: Agritalia, Armonie D'Italia, F. Divella, Ghigi/Zara,
Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, Rummo and Pasta Castiglioni, antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i).
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of this rescission notice in the
This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that silicon metal from Malaysia is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. The period of investigation is April 1, 2019, through March 31, 2020. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.
Effective February 1, 2021.
Genevieve Coen, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3251.
This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce published the notice of initiation of this investigation on July 27, 2020.
The product covered by this investigation is silicon metal from Malaysia. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation,
In accordance with the preamble to Commerce's regulations,
Commerce is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Commerce has calculated export prices in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Normal value (NV) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying the preliminary determination,
Sections 733(d)(1)(ii) and 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provide that in the preliminary determination Commerce shall determine an estimated all-others rate for all exporters and producers not individually examined. This rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and
Commerce preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist:
In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise, as described in Appendix I, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the
Commerce intends to disclose its calculations and analysis performed to interested parties in this preliminary determination within five days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, Commerce intends to verify the information relied upon in making its final determination. Commerce is currently unable to conduct on-site verification of the information relied upon in making its final determination in this investigation. Accordingly, we intend to take additional steps in lieu of on-site verification. Commerce will notify interested parties of any additional documentation or information required.
Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. A timeline for the submission of case briefs and written comments will be notified to interested parties 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.
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, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.
Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. Section 351.210(e)(2) of Commerce's regulations requires that a request by
On November 3, 2020, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e), PMB Silicon requested that Commerce postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, Commerce will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its preliminary determination. If the final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).
The scope of this investigation covers all forms and sizes of silicon metal, including silicon metal powder. Silicon metal contains at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent silicon, and less than 4.00 percent iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor grade silicon (merchandise containing at least 99.99 percent silicon by actual weight and classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2804.61.0000) is excluded from the scope of this investigation.
Silicon metal is currently classifiable under subheadings 2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope remains dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing antidumping duty orders on prestressed concrete steel wire strand (PC strand) from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, the Republic of Turkey (Turkey), and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Kabir Archuletta at (202) 482-2593 (Argentina), Hermes Pinilla at (202) 482-3477 (Colombia), David Crespo at (202) 482-3693 (Egypt), Bryan Hansen at (202) 482-3683 (the Netherlands), Drew Jackson at (202) 482-4406 (Saudi Arabia), Joy Zhang at (202) 482-1168 (Taiwan), David Goldberger at (202) 482-4136 (Turkey), and Charles Doss at (202) 482-4474 (UAE); AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
In accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on December 11, 2020, Commerce published its affirmative final determinations in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations of PC strand from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UAE.
The merchandise covered by these orders is PC strand. For a complete description of the scope of the orders,
On January 25, 2021, in accordance with sections 735(b)(1)(A)(i) and 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of PC strand from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UAE.
Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border
In accordance with section 736 of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on all relevant entries of PC strand from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UAE which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the ITC's notice of final determination in the
We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits for estimated antidumping duties equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication in the
The dumping margins for each antidumping duty order are as follows:
With regard to the ITC's negative critical circumstances determination on imports of PC strand from Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, and Turkey, we will instruct CBP to lift suspension and to refund any cash deposits made to secure the payment of estimated antidumping duties with respect to entries of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 2, 2020 (
Section 733(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except that Commerce may extend the four-month period to no more than six months at the request of exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise. Commerce's
Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation, and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of PC strand from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UAE entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption after January 27, 2021, the date on which the provisional measures expired, through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the
This notice constitutes the antidumping duty orders with respect to PC strand from Argentina, Colombia, Egypt, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UAE pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect at
These orders are published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).
The merchandise covered by these orders is prestressed concrete steel wire strand (PC strand), produced from wire of non-stainless, non-galvanized steel, which is suitable for use in prestressed concrete (both pretensioned and post-tensioned) applications. The product definition encompasses covered and uncovered strand and all types, grades, and diameters of PC strand. PC strand is normally sold in the United States in sizes ranging from 0.25 inches to 0.70 inches in diameter. PC strand made from galvanized wire is only excluded from the scope if the zinc and/or zinc oxide coating meets or exceeds the 0.40 oz./ft2 standard set forth in ASTM-A-475.
The PC strand subject to these orders is currently classifiable under subheadings 7312.10.3010 and 7312.10.3012 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of these orders is dispositive.
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice.
The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is announcing amended dates and deadlines for submitting applications for several upcoming trade missions that were previously announced and published in the
Amendments to Revise Trade Mission Dates, and Deadline for Submitting Applications.
• Cybersecurity Business Development Mission to Peru, Chile, and Uruguay, with an optional stop in Argentina, scheduled for March 1-5, and 8, 2021, postponed to October 18-22, and 25, 2021.
• Cybersecurity Business Development Mission to India, scheduled for April 19-23, 2021, postponed to November 8-12, 2021.
• Trade Mission to the Caribbean Region in conjunction with the Trade Americas—Business Opportunities in the Caribbean Region Conference, scheduled from November 15-20, 2020, postponed to October 24-29, 2021.
• Education Trade Mission to India, scheduled for August 2-7, 2021, postponed to September 12-17, 2022.
• Asia EDGE (Enhancing Development and Growth through Energy) Business Development Mission to Indonesia and Vietnam, scheduled for March 17-26, 2021, postponed to September 16-24, 2021.
The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is amending the Notice published at 85 FR 45172 (July 27, 2020), regarding the dates of ITA's planned Cybersecurity Business Development Mission to Peru, Chile, and Uruguay, with an optional stop in Argentina, which have been modified from March 1-5, and 8, 2021, to October 18-22, and 25, 2021. The Department has been closely monitoring COVID-19 developments and believes postponing the mission is the best decision for the health, safety, and welfare of the participants. The new deadline for applications has been extended to Friday, July 9, 2021. Applications may be accepted after that date if space remains and scheduling constraints permit. Interested U.S. companies and
*
The U.S. Department of Commerce will review applications and make selection decisions on a rolling basis in accordance with the Notice published at 85 FR 12259 (March 10, 2020). The applicants selected will be notified as soon as possible.
The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is amending the Notice published at 85 FR 12259 (March 10, 2020), regarding the dates of ITA's planned Cybersecurity Business Development Mission to India, which have been modified from April 19-23, 2021, to November 8-12, 2021. The Department has been closely monitoring COVID-19 developments and believes postponing the mission is the best decision for the health, safety, and welfare of the participants. The new deadline for applications has been extended to August 5, 2021. Applications may be accepted after that date if space remains and scheduling constraints permit. Interested U.S. companies and trade associations/organizations that have not already submitted an application are encouraged to do so. The schedule is updated as follows:
*
The U.S. Department of Commerce will review applications and make selection decisions on a rolling basis in accordance with the Notice published at 85 FR 12259 (March 10, 2020). The applicants selected will be notified as soon as possible.
The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is amending the Notice published at 85 FR 29928 (May 19, 2020), regarding the dates of ITA's planned Trade Mission to the Caribbean Region in conjunction with the Trade Americas—Business Opportunities in the Caribbean Region Conference, which have been modified from November 15-20, 2020, to October 24-28, 2021. The Department has been closely monitoring COVID-19 developments and believes postponing the mission is the best decision for the health, safety and welfare of the participants. The new deadline for applications has been extended to May 28, 2021. Applications may be accepted after that date if space remains and scheduling constraints permit. Interested U.S. companies and trade associations/organizations that have not already submitted an application are encouraged to do so. The schedule is updated as follows:
*
The U.S. Department of Commerce will review applications and make selection decisions on a rolling basis in accordance with the Notice published at 84 FR 68393 (December 16, 2019). The applicants selected will be notified as soon as possible.
The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is amending the Notice published at 85 FR 56578 (September 14, 2020), regarding the dates of ITA's planned Education Trade Mission to India, which have been modified from August 2-7, 2021, to September 12-17, 2022. The Department has been closely monitoring COVID-19 developments and believes postponing the mission is the best decision for the health, safety, and welfare of the participants. The new deadline for applications has been extended to July 31, 2022. Applications may be accepted after that date if space remains and scheduling constraints permit. Interested U.S. companies and trade associations/organizations that have not already submitted an application are encouraged to do so. The schedule is updated as follows:
*
The U.S. Department of Commerce will review applications and make selection decisions on a rolling basis in accordance with the Notice published at 85 FR 56578 (September 14, 2020). The applicants selected will be notified as soon as possible.
The Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (ITA), is amending the Notice published at 85 FR 54353 (September 1, 2020), regarding the dates of ITA's executive-led Asia EDGE Business Development Mission, which have been modified from March 17-26, 2021, to September 16-24, 2021. The Department has been closely monitoring COVID-19 developments and believes postponing the mission is necessary to ensure safety, health, and welfare of the participants. Mission stops will include Indonesia and Vietnam, with an optional stop in Thailand. The mission will highlight U.S. innovation and technology; spur U.S. industry, jobs, and competitiveness; promote U.S. exports of low-carbon energy resources and technologies; and encourage the development of sustainable, low-carbon energy policies in Southeast Asia.
The new deadline for applications has been extended to May 30, 2021. The Department of Commerce will accept additional applications for this mission and will select a total of 20 firms and/or trade associations, including both previously selected firms and new applicants in accordance with the Notice published at 85 FR 54353 (September 1, 2020). Once all slots have been filled, qualified applicants will be accepted on a waitlist basis. Firms and/or trade associations previously selected to participate in this mission will need to confirm their availability but need not reapply. The applicants selected will be notified as soon as possible.
The proposed schedule is updated as follows *:
*
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
In accordance with the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) is automatically initiating the five-year reviews (Sunset Reviews) of the antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) order(s) and suspended investigation(s) listed below. The International Trade Commission (the ITC) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Commerce official identified in the
Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its
In accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty order(s) and suspended investigation(s):
As a courtesy, we are making information related to sunset proceedings, including copies of the pertinent statute and Commerce's regulations, Commerce's schedule for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past revocations and continuations, and current service lists, available to the public on Commerce's website at the following address:
In accordance with section 782(b) of the Act, any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), Commerce will maintain and make available a public service list for these proceedings. Parties wishing to participate in any of these five-year reviews must file letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d). To facilitate the timely preparation of the public service list, it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding submit an entry of appearance within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties who want access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (APO) to file an APO application immediately following publication in the
Domestic interested parties, as defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b), wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the
If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, Commerce's regulations provide that
This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that standard steel welded wire mesh (wire mesh) from Mexico is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is April 1, 2019, through March 31, 2020. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.
Applicable February 1, 2021.
Alice Maldonado or Melissa Kinter, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4682 or (202) 482-1413, respectively.
This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce published the notice of initiation of this investigation on July 27, 2020.
The products covered by this investigation are wire mesh from Mexico. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation,
In accordance with the preamble to Commerce's regulations,
Commerce is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Commerce has calculated constructed export prices in accordance with section 772(b) of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. Furthermore, pursuant to section 776(a) and (b) of the Act, Commerce has preliminarily relied upon facts otherwise available with adverse inferences for Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. (Deacero). For a full description of the methodology underlying the preliminary determination,
Sections 733(d)(1)(ii) and 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provide that, in the preliminary determination, Commerce shall determine an estimated all-others rate for all exporters and producers not individually examined. This rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-
In this investigation, Commerce preliminarily assigned a rate based entirely on adverse facts available (AFA) to Deacero. Therefore, the only rate that is not zero,
Commerce preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist:
In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise, as described in Appendix I, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the
Commerce normally adjusts cash deposits for estimated antidumping duties by the amount of export subsidies countervailed in a companion countervailing duty (CVD) proceeding, when CVD provisional measures are in effect. Accordingly, where Commerce preliminarily made an affirmative determination for countervailable export subsidies, Commerce has offset the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the appropriate CVD rate. Any such adjusted cash deposit rate may be found in the Preliminary Determination section above.
Should provisional measures in the companion CVD investigation expire prior to the expiration of provisional measures in this LTFV investigation, Commerce will direct CBP to begin collecting estimated antidumping duty cash deposits unadjusted for countervailed export subsidies at the time that the provisional CVD measures expire. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
Commerce intends to disclose its calculations and analysis performed to interested parties in this preliminary determination within five days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, Commerce intends to verify the information relied upon in making its final determination. Normally, Commerce verifies information using standard procedures, including an on-site examination of original accounting, financial, and sales documentation. However, due to current travel restrictions in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, Commerce is unable to conduct on-site verification in this investigation. Accordingly, we intend to verify the information relied upon in making the final determination through alternative means in lieu of an on-site verification.
Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. A timeline for the submission of case briefs and written comments will be notified to interested parties 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.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a
Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. Section 351.210(e)(2) of Commerce's regulations requires that a request by exporters for postponement of the final determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.
On January 13, 2021, and January 21, 2021 pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e), Insteel Industries Inc., Mid South Wire Company, National Wire LLC, Oklahoma Steel & Wire Co., and Wire Mesh Corp. (the petitioners) and Aceromex requested that Commerce postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, Commerce will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its preliminary determination. If the final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).
The merchandise covered by this investigation is uncoated standard welded steel reinforcement wire mesh (wire mesh) produced from smooth or deformed wire. Subject wire mesh is produced in square and rectangular grids of uniformly spaced steel wires that are welded at all intersections. Sizes are specified by combining the spacing of the wires in inches or millimeters and the wire cross-sectional area in hundredths of square inch or millimeters squared. Subject wire mesh may be packaged and sold in rolls or in sheets.
Subject wire mesh is currently produced to ASTM specification A1064/A1064M, which covers carbon-steel wire and welded wire reinforcement, smooth and deformed, for concrete in the following seven styles:
1. 6 X 6 W1.4/W1.4 or D1.4/D1.4
2. 6 X 6 W2.1/W2.1 or D2.1/D2.1
3. 6 X 6 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9
4. 6 X 6 W4/W4 or D4/D4
5. 6 X 12 W4/W4 or D4/D4
6. 4 X 4 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9
7. 4 X 4 W4/W4 or D4/D4
The first number in the style denotes the nominal spacing between the longitudinal wires and the second number denotes the nominal spacing between the transverse wires. In the first style listed above, for example, “6 X 6” denotes a grid size of six inches by six inches. “W” denotes the use of smooth wire, and “D” denotes the use of deformed wire in making the mesh. The number following the W or D denotes the nominal cross-sectional area of the transverse and longitudinal wires in hundredths of a square inch (
Smooth wire is wire that has a uniform cross-sectional diameter throughout the length of the wire.
Deformed wire is wire with indentations or raised transverse ribs, which results in wire that does not have a uniform cross-sectional diameter throughout the length of the wire.
Rolls of subject wire mesh are produced in the following styles and nominal width and length combinations:
All rolled wire mesh is included in scope regardless of length.
Sheets of subject wire mesh are produced in the following styles and nominal width and length combinations:
Any product imported, sold, or invoiced in one of these size combinations is within the scope.
ASTM specification A1064/A1064M provides for permissible variations in wire gauges, the spacing between transverse and longitudinal wires, and the length and width combinations. To the extent a roll or sheet of welded wire mesh falls within these permissible variations, it is within this scope.
ASTM specification A1064/A1064M also defines permissible oversteeling, which is the use of a heavier gauge wire with a larger cross-sectional area than nominally specified. It also permits a wire diameter tolerance of ± 0.003 inches for products up to W5/D5 and ± 0.004 for sizes over W5/D5. A producer may oversteel by increasing smooth or deformed wire diameter up to two whole number size increments on Table 1 of A1064. Subject wire mesh has the following actual wire diameter ranges, which account for both oversteeling and diameter tolerance:
To the extent a roll or sheet of welded wire mesh falls within the permissible variations provided above, it is within this scope.
In addition to the tolerances permitted in ASTM specification A1064/A1064M, wire mesh within this scope includes combinations where:
1. A width and/or length combination varies by ± one grid size in any direction,
2. The center-to-center spacing between individual wires may vary by up to one quarter of an inch from the nominal grid size specified.
Length is measured from the ends of any wire and width is measured between the center-line of end longitudinal wires.
Additionally, although the subject wire mesh typically meets ASTM A1064/A1064M, the failure to include certifications, test reports or other documentation establishing that the product meets this specification does not remove the product from the scope. Wire mesh made to comparable foreign specifications (
Excluded from the scope is wire mesh that is galvanized (
Merchandise subject to this investigation are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 7314.20.0000 and 7314.39.0000. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
The Department of Commerce will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the
The National Sea Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1126) also provides for the designation of a public or private institution of higher education, institute, laboratory, or State or local agency as a Sea Grant college or Sea Grant institute. Applications are required for designation of Sea Grant Colleges and Sea Grant Institutes, although no forms are required. The data the collection provides helps the National Sea Grant Office determine the suitability of the applicant for meeting the standards and conditions for being a Sea Grant College as set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1126 and 15 CFR 918.5.
The NSGO proposes two revisions to this information collection. The NOAA Form 90-2 is currently collected using an Excel spreadsheet (100% of use cases). The NSGO intends to migrate the Excel spreadsheet to an online webform that is hosted on Sea Grant's Planning, Implementation and Evaluation Resource (PIER) database. The online webform would provide an additional and alternative method of information collection, but not eliminate the option for an Excel-based collection. During implementation (testing Q2/3-FY21; rollout Q4-FY21), the webform will likely require cosmetic modifications on the form structure, but no additional data fields will be added. Such modifications will be driven by software requirements and improvements to information management and the user interface. This modification would enable synchronization of existing PIER data, so that time of user entry and data quality control is minimized. Additionally, two new information fields will be added that are required to better resolve two existing data fields, while one field will be eliminated. Such revisions will be reflected on both the Excel-based forms and the webform.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
In notice document 2020-28694, appearing on pages 1483 through 1484 in the issue of Friday, January 8, 2021 make the following correction.
On page 1483, in the second column, in the
Corporation for National and Community Service.
Notice of a Modified Matching Program.
In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, OMB Final Guidance Interpreting the Provisions of the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and OMB Circular No. A-130, “Management of Federal Information Resources,” the Corporation for National and Community Service (operating as AmeriCorps) is issuing a public notice of the computer matching program with the Social Security Administration (SSA).
AmeriCorps will file a report of the subject computer matching agreement with the Office of Management and Budget and Congress. The matching program will begin April 1, 2021 or 40 days after the date of AmeriCorps' submissions to OMB and Congress, whichever is later. The matching program will continue for 18 months after the effective date and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if the conditions specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(2)(D) have been met.
You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by email to:
Terence King, Acting Senior Agency Official for Privacy, 202-815-4246, or by email at
The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503), regulates the use of computer matching agreements by Federal agencies when records in a system of records are matched with other Federal, state, or local government records. Among other things, it requires Federal agencies involved in computer matching agreements to publish a notice in the
This agreement will be in effect for a period of 18 months, with a provision
AmeriCorps will provide SSA with a data file including each applicant's and potential education award recipient's social security number, first and last names, and date of birth. SSA will conduct a match on the identifying information. If the match does not return a result verifying the individual's citizenship status, AmeriCorps will contact the individual or the grant recipient program that selected the individual to verify the results in accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552a(p) and applicable OMB guidelines. The affected individual will have an opportunity to contest the accuracy of the information provided by SSA. The applicant will have at least 30 days from the date of the notice to provide clear and convincing evidence of the accuracy of the social security number, proof of U.S. citizenship, or both.
Applicants will be informed at the time of application that information provided on the application is subject to verification through a computer matching program. The application package will contain a privacy certification notice that the applicant must sign authorizing AmeriCorps to verify the information provided.
For transferees of education awards, at the time an award is transferred, AmeriCorps will provide individual notice that the SSN is subject to verification through a computer matching program. AmeriCorps will send a privacy notice to the transferee, and in the case of a minor, to the parent or legal guardian. The transferee, parent, or legal guardian must sign the privacy certification authorizing AmeriCorps to verify the information provided.
AmeriCorps will furnish a copy of this notice to both Houses of Congress and the Office of Management and Budget.
SSA's legal authority to enter into this agreement is section 1106 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1306) and the regulations promulgated pursuant to that section (20 CFR part 401). The authority for SSA's disclosure of record information is 5 U.S.C. 552a (b)(3).
Section 146(a)(3) of the NCSA (42 U.S.C. 12602(a)) sets forth the eligibility requirements for an individual to receive an Education Award from the National Service Trust upon successful completion of a term of service in an approved national service position. Section 1711 of the Serve America Act (Pub. L. 111-13) directs AmeriCorps to enter into a data matching agreement to verify statements made by an individual declaring that such individual is in compliance with section 146(a)(3) of the NCSA by comparing information provided by the individual with information relevant to such a declaration in the possession of another Federal agency. In accordance with the study AmeriCorps completed pursuant to section 1711 of the Serve America Act, AmeriCorps determined that a data matching program with SSA is the most effective means to verify an individual's statement that he or she is in compliance with section 146(a)(3) of the NCSA.
Department of the Air Force, Department of the Navy, Department of Defense.
Notice of availability of record of decision.
On December 22, 2020, the United States Air Force (USAF) signed the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Environmental Impact Statement: United States Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown Air Force Reserve Command. The Department of the Navy (Navy) previously signed the same ROD on October 29, 2020.
Mr. Hamid Kamalpour, AFCEC/CZN, 2261 Hughes Avenue, Suite 155, JBSA-Lackland Air Force Base, Texas 78236-9853, (210) 925-2738;
The USAF has decided to beddown its 7th Operational squadron (Ops 7) of up to 24 F-35A Primary Aerospace Vehicles Authorized (PAA) with 2 Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI) in one squadron under the Air Force Reserve Command at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth, Texas. The Navy concurs in the Air Force's decision.
The USAF and Navy decision documented in the ROD was based on
This Notice of Availability is published pursuant to the regulations (40 CFR part 1506.6) implementing the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321,
National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI), Office of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education.
Announcement of an open meeting.
This notice sets forth the agenda, time, and instructions to access or participate in the March 3-5, 2021 meeting of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) and provides information to members of the public regarding the meeting, including requesting to make oral comments. The notice of this meeting is required under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and section 114(d)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965, as amended.
The NACIQI meeting will be held on March 3-5, 2021, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. each day.
The NACIQI meeting will be held virtually. See the
George Alan Smith, Executive Director/Designated Federal Official, NACIQI, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 271-03, Washington, DC 20202, telephone: (202) 453-7757, or email:
Please note that a notice setting forth the agenda, time, and instructions to access or participate in a meeting of the NACIQI on February 24-25, 2021 was posted for public inspection by the
You must pre-register at
You must pre-register at
You must pre-register at
• The establishment and enforcement of the standards of accrediting agencies or associations under subpart 2, part H, Title IV of the HEA, as amended.
• The recognition of specific accrediting agencies or associations.
• The preparation and publication of the list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies and associations.
• The eligibility and certification process for institutions of higher education under Title IV of the HEA and part C, subchapter I, chapter 34, Title 42, together with recommendations for improvement in such process.
• The relationship between (1) accreditation of institutions of higher education and the certification and eligibility of such institutions, and (2) State licensing responsibilities with respect to such institutions.
• Any other advisory function relating to accreditation and institutional eligibility that the Secretary of Education may prescribe by regulation.
1. Association of Institutions of Jewish Studies. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation of postsecondary institutions of Jewish Studies within the United States exclusively offering educational programs leading to a certificate, associate degree, baccalaureate degree or their equivalent credential in Jewish Studies or Classical Torah Studies.
2. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (Accreditation Candidate) throughout the United States of education programs in audiology and speech-language pathology leading to the first professional or clinical degree at the master's or doctoral level, and the accreditation of these programs offered via distance education.
3. American Board of Funeral Service Education, Committee on Accreditation. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation of institutions and programs within the United States awarding diplomas, associate degrees and bachelor's degrees in funeral service or mortuary science, including the accreditation of distance learning courses and programs offered by these programs and institutions.
4. Council on Naturopathic Medical Education. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation throughout the United States of graduate-level, four-year naturopathic medical education programs leading to the Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (NMD) or Doctor of Naturopathy (ND).
5. Commission on Massage Therapy Accreditation. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation of institutions and programs in the United States that award postsecondary certificates, postsecondary diplomas, academic Associate degrees and occupational Associate degrees, in the practice of massage therapy, bodywork, and aesthetics/esthetics and skin care.
6. Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation of Montessori teacher education institutions and programs throughout the United States, including those offered via distance education.
7. Midwifery Education Accreditation Council. Scope of Recognition: The accreditation and pre-accreditation throughout the United States of direct-entry midwifery educational institutions and programs conferring degrees and certificates, including the accreditation of such programs offered via distance education.
8. National Accrediting Commission of Career Arts and Sciences Inc., Scope of Recognition: The accreditation throughout the United States of postsecondary schools and departments of cosmetology arts and sciences and massage therapy.
Pursuant to the November 21, 2018 Decision of the Secretary, Docket No. 16-44-0 (available at
b.
c.
The subcommittee will provide an interim report on its work that focuses on § 602.16, Accreditation and preaccreditation standards, paragraph (a)(1)(i).
Submission of requests to make an oral comment regarding a specific accrediting agency under review, or to make an oral comment or written statement regarding other issues within the scope of NACIQI's authority: Opportunity to submit a written statement regarding a specific accrediting agency under review was solicited by previous
Oral comments about an agency's recognition when a compliance report has been required by the senior Department official or the Secretary must relate to the criteria for recognition cited in the senior Department official's letter that requested the report, or in the Secretary's appeal decision, if any. Oral comments about an agency seeking expansion of scope must be directed to the agency's ability to serve as a recognized accrediting agency with respect to the kinds of institutions or programs requested to be added. Oral comments about the renewal of an agency's recognition must relate to its compliance with the Criteria for the Recognition of Accrediting Agencies, which are available at
To request to make a third-party oral comment of three minutes or less during the March 3-5, 2021 meeting, please follow either Method One or Method Two. To submit a written statement to NACIQI concerning its work outside a specific accrediting agency under review, please follow Method One.
20 U.S.C. 1011c.
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
On January 25, 2021, the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (Vermont DEC) notified the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) that Green Mountain Power Corporation submitted an application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification to Vermont DEC on January 22, 2021, in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the Vermont DEC of the following:
If Vermont DEC fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
Take notice that on January 13, 2021, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street Omaha, NE 68124-1000, filed an application under section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to: (1) Establish a buffer zone around the storage facility; (2) designate five geological formations as gas-containing vertical buffer zones; and (3) to recognize the inclusion of the Lower Eau Claire formation into the geologically continuous Mt. Simon A zone of the Mt. Simon gas storage reservoir, all at the Redfield storage facility located in Dallas County, Iowa. Northern seeks authorization for the establishment of a buffer zone approximately one-half mile around the mapped gas extent consisting of approximately 4,847 acres. Northern also seeks authority to establish five geological formations that are currently non-storage formations as buffer formations: The Prairie Du Chien formation; the Franconia formation; the Decorah-Platteville formation; the Fort Atkinson formation; and the Gower 2 formation. The proposed changes will not change the certificated physical parameters, including the certificated storage capacity, of the Field. No new aboveground facilities will be required for the authorities sought herein, all as more fully set forth in the request which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to Michael T. Loeffler, Certificates and External Affairs, Northern Natural Gas Company, P.O. Box 3330, Omaha, NE 68103-0330, by phone at (402) 398-7103, or by email at
Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure,
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project: You can file comments on the project, and you can file a motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on [February 16, 2021].
Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments may include statements of support or objections to the project as a whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or before [February 16, 2021].
There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket number CP21-28-000 in your submission.
(1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment feature, which is located on the Commission's website at
(2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website (
(3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address below.
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1 and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or
Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
The Commission considers all comments received about the project in determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding. For instructions on how to intervene, see below.
Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses, municipalities, and other entities,
To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the Commission
There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both instances, please reference the Project docket number CP21-28-000 in your submission.
(1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website (
(2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below.
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene (option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or
Motions to intervene must be served on the applicant either by mail or email at: P.O. Box 3330, Omaha, NE 68103-0330 or
All timely, unopposed
Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at
In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. For more information and to register, go to
Take notice that on January 21, 2021, Eastern Gas Transmission and Storage, Inc.
Eastern GTS states that, primarily due to delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as weather related delays, Eastern GTS will be unable to complete all construction activities necessary to complete the Project within the authorized one-year timeframe. Accordingly, Eastern GTS requests a six-month extension of time, until August 22, 2021, to complete construction of the Project.
This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on Columbia's request for an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you should, on or before the comment date stated below, file a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).
As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFile” link at
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file scoping comments using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.
l. The Mother Ann Lee Project consists of the following existing facilities: (1) A reservoir with a surface area of 777 acres and a storage capacity of 5,828 acre-feet at elevation 513.12 NGVD 29 (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929); (2) a 250-foot-long, 15.3-foot-high, timber crib dam with a concrete cap and an abandoned 62-foot-long lock structure on the east side; (3) a 120-foot-long, 100-foot-wide forebay; (4) a 24-foot-tall, 84-foot-wide trashrack; (5) a 93-foot-long, 25-foot-wide, 16-foot-high powerhouse integral with the dam containing three generating units with a total installed capacity of 2,210 kilowatts; (6) a 30-foot-long, 15.3-foot-high concrete spillway section from the powerhouse to the west shore; (7) an 85-foot-long substation; and (8) a 34.5 kilovolt, 4,540-foot-long transmission line. The project is estimated to generate an average of 9,200 megawatt-hours annually.
m. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
n. You may also register online at
o.
Copies of the SD1 outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the NEPA document were distributed to the parties on the Commission's mailing list and the applicant's distribution list. Copies of SD1 may be viewed on the web at
Take notice that on January 21, 2021, Eastern Gas Transmission and Storage, Inc.
Eastern GTS states that, primarily due to delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as weather related delays, Eastern GTS will be unable to complete all construction activities necessary to complete the Project within the authorized one-year timeframe. Accordingly, Eastern GTS requests a six-month extension of time, until August 22, 2021, to complete construction of the Project.
This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on Columbia's request for an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you should, on or before the comment date stated below, file a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).
As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,
In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFile” link at
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a resource agency, it must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k.
l.
m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
n.
o.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Part C (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) of the Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority of the Department of Health and Human Services (45 FR 67772-76, dated October 14, 1980, and corrected at 45 FR 69296, October 20, 1980, as amended most recently at 86 FR 6336-6340, dated January 20, 2021) is amended to reflect the Order of Succession for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Section C-C, Order of Succession, is hereby amended as follows:
Delete in its entirety Section C-C, Order of Succession, and insert the following:
During the absence or disability of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or in the event of a vacancy in that office, the first official listed below who is available shall act as Director, except that during a planned period of absence, the Director may specify a different order of succession:
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
The deadline date for the submission of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021: Grants to Enhance Adult Protective Services to Respond to COVID-19 Letter of Assurance is 11:59PM EST March 3, 2021.
The Administration for Community Living (ACL) is establishing the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021: Grants to Enhance Adult Protective Services to Respond to COVID-19 funding opportunity to implement Section 2042(b) of Subtitle B of Title XX of the Social Security Act, otherwise known as the Elder Justice Act (EJA) as authorized and funded through the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021. In accordance with these statutes, the purpose of this opportunity is to enhance and improve adult protective services provided by States and local units of government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Funds awarded under this opportunity will provide Adult Protective Services programs (APS) in the States and territories with resources related to their response during the Coronavirus Public Health Emergency. This funding is intended to enhance, improve, and expand the ability of APS to investigate allegations of abuse, neglect, and exploitation in the context of COVID-19. Examples of activities consistent with the purposes of the authorizing legislation include:
• Improving and supporting remote work, such as the purchase of communications and technology hardware, software, or infrastructure;
• Costs associated with establishing new, or improving existing processes for responding to alleged scams and frauds, especially related to COVID-19 vaccine or cure scams;
• Costs associated with community outreach;
• Costs associated with providing goods and services to APS clients related to COVID-19;
• Acquiring personal protection equipment and supplies;
• Paying for extended hours/over-time for staff, hiring temporary staff, and associated personnel costs;
• Training costs related to COVID-19;
• Funds for travel related to or required by COVID-19.
• Costs associated with assisting APS clients secure the least restrictive option for emergency or alternative housing, and with obtaining, providing, or coordinating with care transitions as appropriate.
Awards authorized under the EJA Section 2042(b) shall be provided to the agency or unit of State government having the legal responsibility for providing adult protective services within the State. This funding must supplement and not supplant existing funding for adult protective services provided by States and local units of government. Additionally, award recipients will be required to submit semi-annual federal financial reports and annual program reports related to the activities performed. To be eligible to receive this grant, the agency or unit of State government having the legal responsibility for providing adult protective services must submit a Letter of Assurance to ACL containing all of the assurances required, and an initial outline of a plan to spend the funds (see below “Section III. Eligibility Criteria and Other Requirements” and “Section IV. Submission Information”).
These awards will be made in the form of formula grants to the agencies and units of State government with the legal responsibility to provide adult protective services.
Under this program announcement, ACL intends to make grant awards to each State and territory, and the District of Columbia. Awards made under this announcement have an estimated start date of April 1, 2021 and an estimated end date of September 30, 2022, for an 18-month budget and performance period.
The total available funding for this opportunity is $93,880,000. Funding will be distributed through the formula identified in Section 2042(b) of the Elder Justice Act. The amounts allocated are based upon the proportion of elders living in each state and territory, as defined in statute, and will be distributed based on the formula. There are no cost-sharing nor match requirements. Below are the projected award amounts:
The eligible entity for these awards is the agency or unit of State government legally responsible for providing adult protective services in each state and territory (EJA Section 2042(b)).
A
1. Assurance that the award recipient is the agency or unit of State government legally responsible for providing adult protective services in each state and territory.
2. Assurance that funds will supplement and not supplant existing APS funding.
3. Assurance that funds will be spent in ways consistent with the Elder Justice Act Section 2042(b); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021; and guidance provided by ACL, including the
• Improving and supporting remote work, such as the purchase of communications and technology hardware, software, or infrastructure;
• Costs associated with establishing new or improving existing processes for responding to alleged scams and frauds, especially related to COVID-19 vaccine or cure scams;
• Costs associated with community outreach;
• Costs associated with providing goods and services to APS clients related to COVID-19;
• Acquiring personal protection equipment and supplies;
• Paying for extended hours/over-time for staff, hiring temporary staff, and associated personnel costs;
• Training costs related to COVID-19;
• Funds for travel related to or required by COVID-19.
4. Assurance to provide semi-annual federal financial reports and annual program reports related to the activities performed.
An
All grant applicants must obtain and keep current a D-U-N-S number from Dun and Bradstreet. It is a nine-digit identification number, which provides unique identifiers of single business entities. The D-U-N-S number can be obtained from:
Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, is not applicable to these grant applications.
To receive funding, eligible entities must provide a
Letters of Assurance and the Initial Spend Plan should be addressed to: Alison Barkoff, Acting Administrator and Assistant Secretary for Aging, Administration for Community Living, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201.
Letters of Assurance and the Initial Spend Plan should be submitted electronically via email to the ACL Regional Administrator for each state. The following table identifies the ACL regions for each state and contact information for each Regional Administrator.
To receive consideration, Letters of Assurance and the Initial Spend Plan must be submitted by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on EST March 3, 2021. Letters of Assurance and the Initial Spend Plan should be submitted electronically via email and have an electronic time stamp indicating the date/time submitted.
Direct programmatic inquiries to: Stephanie Whittier Eliason, Email:
Direct inquiries regarding submission of the Letters of Assurance to the appropriate ACL Regional Administrator found in the table in “Section IV. Submission Information.”
The deadline date for State Agencies on Aging to submit their Letter of Assurance for Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs is 11:59 p.m. EST March 3, 2021.
The purpose of this funding opportunity is to strengthen the capacity of State Long-Term Care Ombudsman programs to respond during the COVID public health emergency and resolve resident complaints about abuse and neglect. This funding opportunity is appropriated through the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021and authorized by the Elder Justice Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 2043(a)(1)(A).
ACL seeks plans from State Agencies on Aging, developed in coordination with the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman, that describe how the Long-Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO) programs will use funds to enhance their capacity during and related to the COVID public health emergency to respond to and resolve complaints about abuse and neglect. This enhancement of capacity can include activities described below. Plans for use of these grant funds may go above and beyond those regular activities planned in response to other funding.
To be eligible to receive this grant, State Agencies on Aging must submit a Letter of Assurance to ACL containing all of the assurances required,
The Letter of Assurance will be considered an Amendment to the State Plan on Aging and must describe the State LTCO plans for use of these supplemental funds. Examples of activities consistent with the purposes of the authorizing legislation include the following:
a. Enhance Ombudsman program complaint investigations during the COVID public health emergency to address complaints related to abuse, neglect and poor care;
b. Resume in-person visitation at such time as visitation is permitted, such as when the COVID vaccine is accessible to residents, facility staff, and individuals working for the LTCO program;
c. Conduct education and outreach on abuse and neglect identification and prevention during the COVID public health emergency to residents, their families and facility staff;
d. Enable travel for representatives of the LTCO Office to ensure all residents have access to a LTCO representative;
e. Continue purchase of needed Personal Protective Equipment;
f. Continue purchase of technology as needed;
g. Enable participation in state-level “strike teams” to address complaints related to care and neglect;
h. Provide information and assistance on transitions from long-term care facilities to community-based, home care settings, consistent with section 712(a)(3) of the Older Americans Act.
These grants are discretionary, supplemental grants, authorized by Section 2043(a)(1)A) of the Elder Justice Act and appropriated through the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021. The State Agency on Aging will assure that the State LTCO uses these supplemental funds consistent with the purposes authorized by appropriations contained in Section 2043(a)(1)A) of the Elder Justice Act and the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021.
The total available funding for this opportunity is $4,000,000. ACL intends to make available, under this program announcement, grant awards to State Agencies on Aging for their Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs. The period of performance for these grants during which grant activities must occur is estimated to commence on April 1, 2021 and is projected to end on September 20, 2022.
Each State Agency on Aging is eligible to apply for and receive the amount of funding in the table below:
1. The eligible entities for this award are State Agencies on Aging Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs
2. Cost Sharing or Matching is not required.
3. State Agencies on Aging must provide a Letter of Assurance that will be considered an Amendment to the State Plan on Aging no later than March 3, 2021. The Letter of Assurance must contain the following:
a. A description of specific project strategies that may include from among the following:
i. Enhancing Ombudsman program complaint investigations during the COVID public health emergency to address complaints related to abuse, neglect and poor care;
ii. Resuming in-person visitation at such time as visitation is permitted,
iii. Conducting education and outreach on abuse and neglect identification and prevention during the COVID public health emergency to residents, their families and facility staff;
iv. Enabling travel for representatives of the LTCO Office to ensure all residents have access to an LTCO;
v. Purchase of needed Personal Protective Equipment;
vi. Purchase of technology; and
vii. Enabling participation in state-level “strike teams” to address complaints related to care and neglect.
b. Assurance that these funds will supplement, and not supplant, existing funding for the State LTCO program; and
c. Assurance that State Agencies on Aging will timely submit to ACL semi-annual federal financial reports and annual program reports related to the activities performed.
All grant applicants must obtain and keep current a D-U-N-S number from Dun and Bradstreet. It is a nine-digit identification number, which provides unique identifiers of single business entities. The D-U-N-S number can be obtained from:
Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, is not applicable to these grant applications.
Letters of Assurance should be submitted electronically via email to the ACL Regional Administrator for each state listed in the Agency Contacts below.
To receive consideration, Letters of Assurance must be submitted by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on March 3, 2021. Letters of Assurance should be submitted electronically via email and have an electronic time stamp indicating the date/time submitted.
Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to Regional Administrators:
Office on Women's Health, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice.
The National Clinical Care Commission (the Commission) will conduct its tenth meeting virtually on February 17, 2021. The Commission is charged to evaluate and make recommendations to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary and Congress regarding improvements to the coordination and leveraging of federal programs related to diabetes and its complications.
The meeting will take place on February 17, 2021, from 1 p.m. to approximately 5:30 p.m. Eastern Standard time (EST).
The meeting will be held online via webinar. To register to attend the meeting, please visit the registration website at:
The National Clinical Care Commission Act (Pub. L. 115-80) requires the HHS Secretary to establish the National Clinical Care Commission. The Commission consists of representatives of specific federal agencies and non-federal individuals who represent diverse disciplines and views. The Commission will evaluate and make recommendations to the HHS Secretary and Congress regarding improvements to the coordination and leveraging of federal programs related to diabetes and its complications.
The tenth meeting will be held virtually, will consist of updates from the Commission's three subcommittees, and include another round of potential “action plans,” or recommendations, from each subcommittee. The final meeting agenda will be available prior to the meeting at:
Written comments are welcome throughout the entire development process of the Commission's work and may be emailed to
Individuals who need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should indicate the special accommodation when registering online or by notifying Jennifer Gillissen at
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provides notice of the extension of the designation issued on July 30, 2020 designating health and medical resources necessary to respond to the spread of the virus associated with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) that are scarce or the supply of which would be threatened by excessive accumulation by people or entities not needing the excess supplies. This notice extends the designation and updates the list of scarce or threatened materials to include certain classes and sizes of hypodermic needles and syringes.
This action took effect February 1, 2021 and terminates on June 30, 2021.
Paige Ezernack: 202-260-0365;
On March 23, 2020, and in response to the spread of the virus associated with COVID-19, President Trump signed Executive Order 13910 (Executive Order) to prevent hoarding of health and medical resources necessary to respond to the spread of COVID-19 within the United States. As provided in the Executive Order, it is the policy of the United States that health and medical resources needed to respond to the spread of COVID-19, such as personal protective equipment and sanitizing and disinfecting products, are appropriately distributed. This policy furthers the goal of protecting the Nation's healthcare systems from undue strain.
Through the Executive Order, the President delegated, to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary), his authority under section 102 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, 50 U.S.C. 4512, as amended (the Act), to prevent hoarding of health and medical resources necessary to respond to the spread of COVID-19 within the United States, and his authority to implement the Act in subsection III of chapter 55 of title 50, United States Code (50 U.S.C. 4554, 4555, 4556, and 4560). Under this delegation and the Act, the Secretary may designate such resources as scarce materials or materials the supply of which would be threatened by such accumulation (threatened materials). The Secretary may also prescribe conditions with respect to accumulation of such materials in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption. The Act prohibits any person or entity from accumulating designated materials (1) in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption, or (2) for the purpose of resale at prices in excess of prevailing market prices.
The March 25 Designation Notice issued by HHS designates scarce materials or threatened materials that are subject to the hoarding prevention measures authorized under the Executive Order and the Act.
The designation is not a “regulation” under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). See 50 U.S.C. 4559 (providing an exemption from the APA). To the extent that it is, the Secretary finds that, in light of the current pandemic, urgent and compelling circumstances make compliance with public comment requirements impracticable. See
The March 25 Designation Notice was scheduled to terminate 120 days from the date of publication, unless superseded by a subsequent notice. Given the ongoing pandemic, the Secretary finds good cause to extend the March 25 Designation Notice, as modified by the June 30, 2020 and July 30, 2020 notices, through June 30, 2021. The Secretary also finds good cause to include the following modifications and additions to the list of scarce or threatened materials:
1. In FR Doc. 2020-06641 of March 30, 2020 (85 FR 17592), add the following text:
(i) On page 17593, first column, (7) Sterilization services, add “or are authorized by FDA under section 564 of the FD&C Act for purposes of decontamination”
(ii) On page 17593, first column, (11) Face masks, remove “PPE”
(iii) On page 17593, first column, (12) Surgical masks, remove “PPE”
2. Add “Syringes and hypodermic needles (whether distributed separately or attached together) generally used in the United States for vaccinations that are either:
(i) Piston syringes in 1 ml or 3 ml sizes that allow for the controlled and precise flow of liquid as described by 21 CFR 880.5860, that are compliant with ISO 7886-1:2017 and use only Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMP) processes; or
(ii) Hypodermic single lumen needles between 1″; and 1.5″ and 22 to 25 gauge between 1″ and 1.5″ and 22 to 25 gauge
A copy of the Notice of the March 25 Designation, including the above modifications and those included in the June 30, 2020 and July 30, 2020 notices is provided below and also can be found on HHS's website.
Health or medical resources, or any of their essential components, determined by the Secretary of HHS to be needed to respond to the spread of COVID-19 and which are, or are likely to be, in short supply (scarce materials) or the supply of which would be threatened by hoarding (threatened materials). Designated scarce materials or threatened materials are subject to periodic review by the Secretary.
The following materials are designated pursuant to section 102 of the Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. 4512) and Executive Order 13190 of March 23, 2020 (Preventing Hoarding of Health and Medical Resources to Respond to the Spread of COVID-19) as scarce materials or threatened materials:
1. N-95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators, including devices that are disposable half-face-piece non-powered air-purifying particulate respirators intended for use to cover the nose and mouth of the wearer to help reduce wearer exposure to pathogenic biological airborne particulates
2. Other Filtering Facepiece Respirators (
3. Elastomeric, air-purifying respirators and appropriate particulate filters/cartridges
4. Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPR)
5. Portable Ventilators, including portable devices intended to mechanically control or assist patient breathing by delivering a predetermined percentage of oxygen in the breathing gas
6. Sterilization services for any device as defined in section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and sterilizers as defined in 21 CFR 880.6860, 880.6870, and 880.6880, including devices that already have FDA marketing authorization and those that do not have FDA marketing authorization but are intended for the same uses, or are authorized by FDA under section 564 of the FD&C Act for purposes of decontamination
7. Disinfecting devices intended to kill pathogens and other kinds of microorganisms by chemical means or physical means, including those defined in 21 CFR 876.1500, 880.6992, and 892.1570 and other sanitizing and disinfecting products suitable for use in a clinical setting
8. Medical gowns or apparel,
9. Personal protective equipment (PPE) coveralls,
10. Face masks, including any masks that cover the user's nose and mouth and may or may not meet fluid barrier or filtration efficiency levels
11. Surgical masks, including masks that covers the user's nose and mouth and provides a physical barrier to fluids and particulate materials
12. PPE face shields, including those defined at 21 CFR 878.4040 and those intended for the same purpose
13. PPE gloves or surgical gloves, including those defined at 21 CFR 880.6250 (exam gloves) and 878.4460 (surgical gloves) and such gloves intended for the same purposes
14. Ventilators, anesthesia gas machines modified for use as ventilators, and positive pressure breathing devices modified for use as ventilators (collectively referred to as “ventilators”), ventilator tubing connectors, and ventilator accessories as those terms are described in FDA's March 2020 Enforcement Policy for Ventilators and Accessories and Other Respiratory Devices During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Public Health Emergency located at
15. Laboratory reagents and materials used for isolation of viral genetic material and testing, such as transport media, collection swabs, test kits and reagents specific to those kits, and consumables such as plastic pipette tips and plastic tubes
16. Drug products currently recommended by the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel, including (as of July 30, 2020) remdesivir and dexamethasone
17. Alcohol-based (over 60 percent) hand sanitizer and rubs.
18. Syringes and hypodermic needles (whether distributed separately or attached together) generally used in the United States for vaccinations that are either:
(i) Piston syringes in 1 ml or 3 ml sizes that allow for the controlled and precise flow of liquid as described by 21 CFR 880.5860, that are compliant with ISO 7886-1:2017 and use only Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMP) processes; or
(ii) Hypodermic single lumen needles between 1″ and 1.5″ and 22 to 25 gauge between 1″ and 1.5″ and 22 to 25 gauge that have engineered sharps injury protections as described in the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act, Public Law 106-430, 114 Stat. 1901 (Nov. 6, 2000) and OSHA standard 29 CFR 1910.1030, Bloodborne Pathogens.”
The authority for this Notice is Executive Order 13910 and section 102 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, 50 U.S.C. 4512, as amended.
Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice.
This notice provides an update of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) poverty guidelines to account for last calendar year's increase in prices as measured by the Consumer Price Index.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Room 404E, Humphrey Building, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC 20201.
For information about how the guidelines are used or how income is defined in a particular program, contact the Federal, state, or local office that is responsible for that program. For information about poverty figures for immigration forms, the Hill-Burton Uncompensated Services Program, and the number of people in poverty, use the specific telephone numbers and addresses given below.
For general questions about the poverty guidelines themselves, contact Kendall Swenson, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Room 404E.3, Humphrey Building, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC 20201—telephone: (202) 795-7309—or visit
For information about the percentage multiple of the poverty guidelines to be used on immigration forms such as USCIS Form I-864, Affidavit of Support, contact U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at 1-800-375-5283. You also may visit
For information about the Hill-Burton Uncompensated Services Program (free or reduced-fee health care services at certain hospitals and other facilities for persons meeting eligibility criteria involving the poverty guidelines), contact the Health Resources and Services Administration Information Center at 1-800-638-0742. You also may visit
For information about the number of people in poverty, visit the Poverty section of the Census Bureau's website at
Section 673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)) requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to update the poverty guidelines at least annually, adjusting them on the basis of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The poverty guidelines are used as an eligibility criterion by Medicaid and a number of other Federal programs. The
As required by law, this update is accomplished by increasing the latest published Census Bureau poverty thresholds by the relevant percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The guidelines in this 2021 notice reflect the 1.2 percent price increase between calendar years 2019 and 2020. After this inflation adjustment, the guidelines are rounded and adjusted to standardize the differences between family sizes. In rare circumstances, the rounding and standardizing adjustments in the formula result in small decreases in the poverty guidelines for some household sizes even when the inflation factor is not negative. In cases where the year-to-year change in inflation is not negative and the rounding and standardizing adjustments in the formula result in reductions to the guidelines from the previous year for some household sizes, the guidelines for the affected household sizes are fixed at the prior year's guidelines. As in prior years, these 2021 guidelines are roughly equal to the poverty thresholds for calendar year 2020 which the Census Bureau expects to publish in final form in September 2021.
The poverty guidelines continue to be derived from the Census Bureau's current official poverty thresholds; they are not derived from the Census Bureau's Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM).
The following guideline figures represent annual income.
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $4,540 for each additional person.
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $5,680 for each additional person.
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $5,220 for each additional person.
Separate poverty guideline figures for Alaska and Hawaii reflect Office of Economic Opportunity administrative practice beginning in the 1966-1970 period. (Note that the Census Bureau poverty thresholds—the version of the poverty measure used for statistical purposes—have never had separate figures for Alaska and Hawaii.) The poverty guidelines are not defined for Puerto Rico or other outlying jurisdictions. In cases in which a Federal program using the poverty guidelines serves any of those jurisdictions, the Federal office that administers the program is generally responsible for deciding whether to use the contiguous-states-and-DC guidelines for those jurisdictions or to follow some other procedure.
Due to confusing legislative language dating back to 1972, the poverty guidelines sometimes have been mistakenly referred to as the “OMB” (Office of Management and Budget) poverty guidelines or poverty line. In fact, OMB has never issued the guidelines; the guidelines are issued each year by the Department of Health and Human Services. The poverty guidelines may be formally referenced as “the poverty guidelines updated periodically in the
Some federal programs use a percentage multiple of the guidelines (for example, 125 percent or 185 percent of the guidelines), as noted in relevant authorizing legislation or program regulations. Non-Federal organizations that use the poverty guidelines under their own authority in non-Federally-funded activities also may choose to use a percentage multiple of the guidelines.
The poverty guidelines do not make a distinction between farm and non-farm families, or between aged and non-aged units. (Only the Census Bureau poverty thresholds have separate figures for aged
This notice does not provide definitions of such terms as “income” or “family” as there is considerable variation of these terms among programs that use the poverty guidelines. The legislation or regulations governing each program define these terms and determine how the program applies the poverty guidelines. In cases where legislation or regulations do not establish these definitions, the entity that administers or funds the program is responsible to define such terms as “income” and “family.” Therefore questions such as net or gross income, counted or excluded income, or household size should be directed to the entity that administers or funds the program.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The National Park Service is soliciting electronic comments on the significance of properties nominated before January 16, 2021, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.
Comments should be submitted electronically by February 16, 2021.
Comments are encouraged to be submitted electronically to
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 January 16, 2021. 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:
A request for removal has been made for the following resource:
Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty orders on certain
Instituted February 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is March 3, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by April 14, 2021.
Mary Messer (202-205-3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) The
(6) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS,
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-482, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the
This proceeding is being conducted under authority of Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted a review pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on ironing tables and certain parts thereof from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.
Instituted February 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is March 3, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by April 14, 2021.
Mary Messer (202-205-3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-479, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping duty order on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line, and pressure pipe from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.
Instituted February 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is March 3, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by April 14, 2021.
Mary Messer (202-205-3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS,
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-481, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the
This proceeding is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted a review pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on potassium permanganate from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.
Instituted February 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is March 3, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by April 14, 2021.
Mary Messer (202-205-3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS,
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-480, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping duty order on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the
This proceeding is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice
30-Day notice.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Department of Justice (DOJ) will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until March 3, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
On January 21, 2021 a Notice of Motion was filed in the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of San Francisco in the proceeding entitled
The Settlement Agreement would resolve a proof of claim by the EPA under Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9607, against WEIC involving the insured Pioneer Metals Finishing Co., Inc. (“Pioneer Metals”) at the Pioneer Metals Finishing Superfund Site. EPA filed a proof of claim in the instant proceeding against WEIC arising from policies of insurance that WEIC companies had issued to Pioneer Metals based on liability for contamination at the Pioneer Metals Finishing Superfund Site.
Under the Settlement Agreement, WEIC will pay to the United States $1,200,000 million to the EPA. In consideration of this payment, upon approval of the Settlement Agreement, the EPA covenants not to file a civil action against the Insurance Commissioner, the California Department of Insurance, the California Conservation and Liquidation Office and WEIC with respect to all liabilities and obligations to Pioneer Metals or the EPA arising under CERCLA under the Policies issued by the WEIC to Pioneer Metals, whether such liabilities and obligations are known or unknown, reported or unreported, and whether currently existing or arising in the future. The Settlement Agreement is conditioned upon court approval. The Commissioner will appear at a hearing to present the motion seeking approval the Settlement Agreement on February 24, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 302 of the San Francisco County Superior Court located at 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, California 94102.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Settlement Agreement. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the Settlement Agreement may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website:
Please enclose a check or money order for $2.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.
On December 17, 2020, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in the lawsuit entitled
The United States, in conjunction with the State of Utah, the State of Rhode Island, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Workforce Development, Department of Labor Standards, filed this lawsuit under the Toxic Substances Control Act alleging violations of the Act's Renovation, Repair, and Painting (“RRP”) regulations, 40 CFR part 745, which address lead paint hazards at home renovations. The complaint alleges that Home Depot performed renovations through its retail stores at approximately 2000 homes covered by the RRP regulations without using EPA certified firms, among other allegations. The proposed consent decree requires Home Depot to institute a compliance program and pay a civil penalty of $20,750,000.
On December 23, 2020, the Department of Justice published notice of the lodging of the proposed consent decree. 85 FR 84,001. The notice started a 30-day period for the submission of comments on the proposed consent decree. The Department of Justice has received a request for an extension of the comment period. In consideration of the request, notice is hereby given that the Department of Justice has extended the comment period on the proposed consent decree by an additional 30 days, up to and including February 22, 2021. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the proposed consent decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website:
Please enclose a check or money order for $22.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Intent to conduct scoping process and prepare environmental impact statement; public scoping meeting and request for comment.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will conduct a scoping process to gather information necessary to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the environmental impacts for the subsequent license renewal of the operating licenses for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Point Beach). The NRC is seeking public comment on this action and has scheduled a public scoping meeting that will take place as an online webinar.
The NRC will hold a public scoping meeting as an online webinar on February 17, 2021, from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). Submit comments on the scope of the EIS by March 3, 2021. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods; however, the NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal Rulemaking Website:
•
•
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the
Phyllis Clark, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6447, email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2020-0277 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal Rulemaking Website (
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
By letter dated November 16, 2020 (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML20329A292), NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC (NextEra) submitted to the NRC an application for subsequent license renewal (SLR) of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27 for Point Beach, Units 1 and 2, respectively, for an additional 20 years of operation. This submission initiated the NRC's proposed action of determining whether to grant the SLR application. The Point Beach units are pressurized water reactors designed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation and are located on the shore of Lake Michigan, in the Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, approximately 15 miles north-northeast of Manitowoc. The current renewed facility operating license for Unit 1 expires at midnight on October 5, 2030, and the current renewed facility operating license for Unit 2 expires at midnight on March 8, 2033. The SLR application was submitted pursuant to part 54 of title 10 of the
This notice informs the public of the NRC's intention to conduct environmental scoping and prepare an EIS related to the SLR application for Point Beach, and to provide the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29.
The regulations in 36 CFR 800.8, “Coordination With the National Environmental Policy Act,” allow agencies to use their National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321,
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, NextEra submitted an environmental report (ER) as part of the SLR application. The ER was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 and is publicly available at ADAMS Accession No. ML20329A248. The ER will also be available for viewing at
The NRC intends to gather the information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to NUREG-1437, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants” (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML13107A023) (GEIS), related to the SLR application for Point Beach. The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. This notice is being published in accordance with NEPA and the NRC's regulations at 10 CFR part 51.
The supplement to the GEIS will evaluate the environmental impacts of subsequent license renewal for Point Beach, and reasonable alternatives thereto. Possible alternatives to the proposed action include the no action alternative and reasonable alternative energy sources.
As part of its environmental review, the NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation in this scoping process by members of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following:
a. Define the proposed action that is to be the subject of the supplement to the GEIS;
b. Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to be analyzed in depth;
c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or are not significant or that have been covered by prior environmental review;
d. Identify any environmental assessments and other ElSs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the supplement to the GEIS under consideration;
e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action;
f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the NRC's tentative planning and decision-making schedule;
g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies; and
h. Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, including any contractor assistance to be used.
The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping:
a. The applicant, NextEra;
b. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards;
c. Affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards;
d. Any affected Indian Tribe;
e. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process; and
f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for leave to intervene under 10 CFR 2.309.
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26(b), the scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to the proposed action and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in the EIS.
The NRC is announcing that it will hold a public scoping meeting as an online webinar for the Point Beach subsequent license renewal supplement to the GEIS. The webinar will include a telephone line for members of the public to provide comments. A court reporter will transcribe all comments received during the webinar. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meeting or in writing, as discussed in the
The public scoping meeting will include: (1) An overview by the NRC staff of the environmental and safety review processes, the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions on environmental issues or the proposed scope of the Point Beach subsequent license renewal supplement to the GEIS.
Participation in the scoping process for the Point Beach subsequent license renewal supplement to the GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Matters related to participation in any hearing are outside the scope of matters to be discussed at this public meeting.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Weeks of February 1, 8, 15, 22, March 1, 8, 2021.
Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
Public.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of February 1, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of February 22, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of March 1, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of March 8, 2021.
For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Wesley Held at 301-287-3591 or via email at
The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the internet at:
The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (
Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555, at 301-415-1969, or by email at
The NRC is holding the meetings under the authority of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Monday, February 8, 2021, at 10:00 a.m.; and Tuesday, February 9, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.
Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, in the Benjamin Franklin Room.
Monday, February 8, 2021, at 10:00 a.m.—Closed; Tuesday, February 9, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.—Open.
1. Strategic Issues.
2. Financial and Operational Matters.
3. Compensation and Personnel Matters.
4. Administrative Items.
1. Remarks of the Chairman of the Board of Governors.
2. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board.
3. Remarks of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board.
4. Remarks of the Postmaster General and CEO.
5. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meetings.
6. Committee Reports.
7. Quarterly Financial Report.
8. Quarterly Service Performance Report.
9. Approval of Tentative Agendas for May Meetings.
Michael J. Elston, Secretary of the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone: (202) 268-4800.
On July 23, 2020, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”)
On September 10, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act
The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
86 FR 6687, January 22, 2021.
Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 2:00 p.m.
The Closed Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 2:00 p.m., has been cancelled.
For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise the ICC Rulebook (the “Rules”) to provide for the clearance of an additional Standard Emerging Market Sovereign CDS contract (the “EM Contract”).
In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adopt rules that will provide the basis for ICC to clear an additional credit default swap contract. ICC proposes to make such change effective following Commission approval of the proposed rule change. ICC believes the addition of this contract will benefit the market for credit default swaps by providing market participants the benefits of clearing, including reduction in counterparty risk and safeguarding of margin assets pursuant to clearing house rules. Clearing of the additional EM Contract will not require any changes to ICC's Risk Management Framework or other policies and procedures constituting rules within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”).
ICC proposes amending Subchapter 26D of its Rules to provide for the clearance of the additional EM Contract, namely Ukraine. This additional EM Contract has terms consistent with the other EM Contracts approved for clearing at ICC and governed by Subchapter 26D of the Rules. A minor revision to Subchapter 26D (Standard Emerging Market Sovereign (“SES”) Single Name) is made to provide for clearing the additional EM Contract. Specifically, in Rule 26D-102 (Definitions), “Eligible SES Reference Entities” is modified to include Ukraine in the list of specific Eligible SES Reference Entities to be cleared by ICC.
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
Clearing of the additional EM Contract will also satisfy the relevant requirements of Rule 17Ad-22,
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(17)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(8), (9) and (10)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13)
The additional EM Contract will be available to all ICC participants for clearing. The clearing of the additional EM Contract by ICC does not preclude the offering of the additional EM Contract for clearing by other market participants. Accordingly, ICC does not believe that clearance of the additional EM Contract will impose any burden on competition not necessary or
Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written comments received by ICC.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2021-002 and should be submitted on or before February 22, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On July 17, 2020, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “BYX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”)
On September 10, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act
The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges to establish annual fees for Exchange Traded Products that have a maturity date and for products that are based on an expected return over a specific outcome period. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective January 12, 2021.
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges to establish annual fees for Exchange Traded Products (“ETPs”)
The proposed change responds to the current extremely competitive environment for ETPs listings in which issuers can readily favor competing venues or transfer their listings if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or discount opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. The Exchange's current annual fees for ETPs is based on the number of shares outstanding per issuer and provide incentives for issuers to list multiple series of certain securities on the Exchange. In response to the competitive environment for listings, the Exchange adopted a competitive pricing structure that combines higher minimum annual fees for certain securities with discounts for issuers that list multiple ETPs. The proposed change is designed to offer annual listing fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period based on the annual fees for ETPs that track an index.
The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective January 12, 2021.
Annual fees are assessed each January in the first full calendar year following the year of listing. The aggregate total shares outstanding is calculated based on the total shares outstanding as reported by the Fund issuer or Fund “family” in its most recent periodic filing with the Commission or other publicly available information. Annual fees apply regardless of whether any of these Funds are listed elsewhere.
The Exchange proposes to offer annual listing fees for two types of ETPs: (1) ETPs that have a specific maturity date, such as a fixed income ETP that primarily holds a diversified portfolio of fixed income bonds that provides regular interest payments and distributes a final payout in its stated maturity year; and (2) ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period, which are designed to provide a particular set of returns over a specific period based on the performance of an underlying instrument during the ETP's outcome period. Such ETPs include a buffer strategy that seeks to provide investment returns that match the gains of a particular index(s) up to a maximum annual return, or cap level, while guarding against declines in the same underlying index(s), a buffer level, over a particular time period. Currently, both types of ETPs are eligible for the annual fees set forth in section 6.b. of the Schedule of Fees and Charges, which are applicable to Managed Fund Shares, Managed Trust Securities, Active Proxy Portfolio Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares and Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed under Rule 5.2-E(j)(8) that do not track an index. Generally, the products eligible for fees under section 6.b. of the Schedule of Fees and Charges entail more active issuer management and therefore incur higher Exchange costs, including costs related to issuer services, listing administration, product development and regulatory oversight.
The Exchange proposes that ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period would be eligible for the lower fees set forth in section 6.a. of the Schedule of Fees and
An ETP designed to provide a particular set of returns over a specific outcome period utilizing a buffer strategy as described above is designed to provide investment returns that match the gains of a particular index(s) up to a maximum cap level while guarding against declines in the same underlying index(s) below a certain buffer level over a specified time period, which is very similar to how a fund based on an index operates. Moreover, an ETP with a maturity date designed to end on a specific date would not require the same open-ended commitment of Exchange resources as the more traditional types of actively managed products eligible for fees under section 6.b. of the Schedule of Fees and Charges that do not have a specified end date. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed lower fees are appropriate because ETPS that have a maturity date and that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period, like products that track an index, generally require the expenditure of less Exchange resources to support listing and administration. Charging lower fees for such products would thus more closely correlate the listing fee applicable to the issuer of ETPs to the costs associated with listing and trading such products, including costs related to issuer services, listing administration, product development and regulatory oversight. Structured products would continue to be charged annual fees under section 7 of the Schedule of Fees and Charges.
The proposed change described above is not otherwise intended to address other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems that market participants would have in complying with the proposed changes.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market for the listing of ETPs. Specifically, ETP issuers can readily favor competing venues or transfer listings if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or discount opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. The Exchange's current annual fees for ETPs are based on the number of shares outstanding per issuer and provide incentives for issuers to list multiple series of certain securities on the Exchange. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.”
The Exchange believes that the ongoing competition among the exchanges with respect to new listings and the transfer of existing listings among competitor exchanges demonstrates that issuers can choose different listing markets in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain exchange listing fees. Stated otherwise, changes to exchange listing fees can have a direct effect on the ability of an exchange to compete for new listings and retain existing listings.
Annual fees for ETPs are based on the number of shares outstanding per issuer, and then are further differentiated based on whether the ETP is index based or not, with lower annual fees for ETPs that are based on an index. As discussed above, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to charge annual fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period based on that same differentiation. The Exchange believes that, given the characteristics of such ETPs, charging the same, lower fees as the Exchange currently charges ETPs that track an index would be reasonable because those relatively lower annual fees better correlate with the generally lesser Exchange costs associated with listing and trading ETPs that track an index, including costs related to issuer services, listing administration and product development. Given the current competitive environment, the Exchange believes that the proposed change is a reasonable attempt to establish listing fees for products that, like products that track an index, require a decreased expenditure of Exchange resources to support listing and administration, thereby enhancing competition among issuers and listing venues. The Exchange also believes that lower annual fees may reduce the barriers to entry and incentivize enhanced competition among issuers of ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive pricing structure designed to incentivize issuers to list new products and transfer existing products to the Exchange, which the Exchange believes will enhance competition both among ETP issuers and listing venues, to the benefit of investors.
The Exchange believes the proposal equitably allocates its fees among its market participants. In the prevailing competitive environment, issuers can readily favor competing venues or transfer listings if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or discount opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. The proposed fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period are equitable because the proposed annual fees would apply uniformly to all issuers. Moreover, the proposed fees would be equitably allocated among issuers because issuers would continue to qualify for the annual listing fee based on issuing ETPs that have a maturity date and that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period and for the annual fee based on the number of shares outstanding and under criteria applied uniformly to all such issuers. For the same reasons, the proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category of market participant.
The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly discriminatory.
Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement regarding the burden on competition.
For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On October 8, 2020, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange has proposed to exclude companies listed pursuant to Nasdaq Rule IM-5101-2 whose business plan is to engage in a merger or acquisition with one or more unidentified companies within a specified period of time (“SPACs”), prior to the completion of any such merger or acquisition, from the requirement that at least 50% of the company's required minimum number of round lot holders must each hold unrestricted securities with a market value of at least $2,500 at the time of initial listing (“Required Minimum Amount”).
The Exchange states in its proposal that it imposed the Required Minimum Amount to help ensure that at least 50% of the required minimum number of shareholders hold a meaningful value of unrestricted securities and that a company has sufficient investor interest to support an exchange listing.
The Exchange states that it does not believe the Required Minimum Amount is as relevant to the listing of SPACs.
The Exchange accordingly believes that SPACs should be excluded from the Required Minimum Amount and proposes to revise Nasdaq Rules 5315(f)(1)(C) (for the Nasdaq Global Select Market), 5405(a)(3) (for the Nasdaq Global Market), and 5505(a)(3) (for the Nasdaq Capital Market) to exclude SPACs from the requirement to meet the Required Minimum Amount at the time of initial listing.
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
The Commission has consistently recognized that the development and enforcement of meaningful listing standards for an exchange is of critical importance to financial markets and the investing public.
The Exchange has proposed to exclude SPACs, prior to the completion of a business combination, from the requirement to meet the Required Minimum Amount at the time of initial listing on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, Nasdaq Global Market, and Nasdaq Capital Market. As described above, the Exchange states that, unlike with operating companies where the
Given the differences between SPACs and operating companies, including in their structure, and the rights of SPAC shareholders to convert or redeem their shares upon a business combination for a pro rata portion of the IPO proceeds maintained in a trust account, the Commission believes that it is reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory for the Exchange to exclude SPACs from the requirement to meet the Required Minimum Amount at the time of initial listing of the SPAC. Specifically, the Commission believes the Exchange has provided a reasonable basis for its proposal to differentiate SPACs from operating companies in terms of the requirement to comply with the Required Minimum Amount upon initial listing given that, in the Exchange's experience, SPACs do not appear to present a similar risk of circumventing the round lot holder requirement through share transfers for no value. As the Exchange states in its proposal, typically the only investors holding shares in a SPAC prior to an IPO are its founders, whereas other round lot holders generally represent new investors, in contrast to the Exchange's experience with operating companies.
Further, the Exchange's other initial listing requirements will remain applicable to SPACs at the time of their initial listing including, among other things, that round lot holders hold unrestricted shares and that SPACs will continue to meet the minimum number and market value of unrestricted publicly held shares requirements as well as the other listing requirements on the applicable market tier, in addition to the specific listing criteria applicable to SPACs.
These other listing requirements, taken together, should continue to help ensure that SPACs are listed only if there will be a sufficient market, with adequate depth and liquidity and with sufficient investor interest to support an exchange listing, and will continue to provide investors the redemption feature. The Commission also notes that the Exchange's proposal is consistent with SPAC listing standards on other listing exchanges that do not require round lot holders to hold unrestricted securities of a minimum market value amount.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
2:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 4, 2021.
The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
This meeting will be closed to the public.
Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.
In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at
The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the following topics:
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Resolution of litigation claims; and
Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.
At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.
For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “Cboe Options”) proposes to amend the definition of “current market value” for purposes of calculating margin requirements for certain options. The text of the proposed rule change is provided below.
(a)
(1) No change.
(2) The term “current market value” is as defined in Section 220.[3]
The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend the definition of “current market value” with respect to certain ETF options for purposes of calculating margin requirements. Rule 10.3(a)(2) currently defines the term “current market value” as follows:
The term “current market value” is as defined in Section 220.3 of Regulation T of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. At any other time, in the case of options, stock index warrants, currency index warrants and currency warrants, it shall mean the closing price of that series of options or warrants on the Exchange on any day with respect to which a determination of current market value is made, except in the case of certain index options determined by the Exchange, it shall be based on quotes for that series of options on the Exchange 15 minutes prior to the close of trading on any day with respect to which a determination of current market value is made. In the case of other securities, it shall mean the preceding business day's closing price as shown by any regularly published reporting or quotation service. If there is no closing price or quotes, as applicable, on the option or on another security, a TPH organization may use a reasonable estimate of the current market value of the security as of the close of business or as of 15 minutes prior to the closing of trading, respectively, on the preceding business day.
Rule 10.3 and other Rules in Chapter 10 of the Exchange's Rulebook describe how margin requirements are calculated for market participants' positions in options (and certain other securities), including strategy-based margin and customer portfolio margin requirements, which requirements are generally based on the current market value of the option series. These requirements are determined on a daily basis for market participants' securities accounts that hold options positions.
A number of options overlie exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) that track the same indexes on which the Exchange lists index options.
The Exchange recently amended the definition of “current market value” to provide that, for certain index options determined by the Exchange, it would be based on quotes for a series of options on the Exchange 15 minutes prior to the close of trading rather than the closing price.
Currently, the Exchange determines the daily settlement price for all ETF options at the time at which they close for trading, which as noted above, is at 4:15 p.m. for a number of ETF options. Several of these ETF options overlie an ETF that tracks an index on which the Exchange lists index options, including index options for which the Exchange determines the current market value for margin requirements 15 minutes prior to the closing time. The Exchange has received numerous requests from market participants to determine the current market value for such ETF options at the same time at which it determines the current market value for corresponding index options. Therefore, to permit the Exchange to align the times at which the current market value of index options and options overlying ETFs that track the same indexes is determined for purposes of calculating daily margin requirements, the Exchange proposes to amend the definition of current market value with respect to certain Exchange-designated ETF options
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
In particular, the Exchange believes alignment between the times at which related options prices are used to calculate daily margin requirements will protect investors. In fact, the Exchange has received numerous requests from market participants to make this change. Among other things, the Exchange believes this alignment will prevent increased risk to market participants that hold positions across related options products due to potential disparities that could occur in relation to factors such as margin requirements, pay-collect obligations, the synchronization of existing hedges, and the level of end-of-day risk. Differing daily valuation times for these products may cause offset relationships between options positions to be lost, which may distort the true status of risk within a market participant's portfolio. Use of the same determination time for margin calculations reduces risk of a disconnect
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will also promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by permitting alignment of daily marks for related products that market participants often use in a complementary manner as part of their investment and hedging strategies. The Act authorizes the Exchange to prescribe standards of financial responsibility for Trading Permit Holders, and the proposed rule change regarding the daily value to be used for calculation of daily margin requirements for options positions is consistent with that authority.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The primary purpose of the proposed rule change is to align margin calculations for related products in the securities industries. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed change related to margin requirements for the designated options will apply in the same manner to all market participants that hold positions in those options. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed rule change relates to margin requirements the Exchange imposes on its Trading Permit Holders. As noted above, the Exchange recently made a similar rule change to permit it to align the time at which it determines current market value for index options with the time at which a futures exchange determined the daily settlement value for related futures products for substantially similar purposes. Other options exchanges may choose to similarly change the time at which current market value will be determined for purposes of their margin rules.
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange stated that it believes waiver of the operative delay will protect investors by permitting the Exchange to align the times at which the current market value of ETF options with the times at which the current market value of related index options in securities accounts are determined as soon as practicable. The Exchange also stated that it believes this will benefit market participants by preventing potential price distortions between related options and reduce pricing risks to market participants that hold positions in ETF options and related index options that may occur if the time at which the current market value of options was determined differed from the time at which the daily settlement value of related futures was determined. The Exchange also noted the proposed rule change is not novel, because the Exchange recently made a similar rule change to permit it to align the time at which it determines current market value for index options with the time at which a futures exchange determined the daily settlement value for related futures products for substantially similar purposes. The Exchange stated it will announce to Trading Permit Holders the date on which the change will be implemented in accordance with Rule 1.5 (
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
The Department of State will conduct a public meeting of the Shipping Coordination Committee at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, April 29, 2021, by way of teleconference. Members of the public may participate up to the capacity of the teleconference phone line, which will handle 500 participants. To access the teleconference line, participants should call (202) 475-4000 and use Participant Code: 138 541 34#.
The primary purpose of the meeting is to prepare for the 103rd session of the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee to be held remotely, May 5 to 14, 2021.
The agenda items to be considered include:
Those who plan to participate may contact the meeting coordinator, LT Jessica Anderson, by email at
Additional information regarding this and other IMO public meetings may be found at:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information collection. The
Written comments should be submitted by March 3, 2021.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
Sandra Ray by email at:
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
Notice of request for extension of currently approved information collection.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that FHWA will submit the collection of information described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
Please submit comments by March 3, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number 2020-0030 by any of the following methods:
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Michael Dougherty 202-366-9234, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Highway Policy Information, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The estimated annual reporting burden is 102 hours; the estimated recordkeeping burden is 510 hours for a total of 612 hours. The 50 States and the District of Columbia share this burden. Preparing and processing the annual certification is estimated to require 2 hours per State. Recordkeeping is estimated to require an average of 10 hours per State.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that FHWA will submit the collection of information described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
Please submit comments by March 3, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID 2020-0027 by any of the following methods:
Mark Ferroni, 202-366-3233, Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 6:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Reduction of highway traffic noise should occur through a program of shared responsibility with the most effective strategy being implementation of noise compatible planning and land use control strategies by state and local governments. Local governments can use their power to regulate land development to prohibit noise-sensitive land use development adjacent to a highway, or to require that developers plan, design, and construct development in ways that minimize noise impacts. The FHWA noise regulations limit Federal participation in the construction of noise barriers along existing highways to those projects proposed along lands where land development or substantial construction predated the existence of any highway. The data reflects the flexibility in noise abatement decision-making. Some states have built many noise barriers while a few have built none. Through the end of 2010, 47 SDOTs and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have constructed over 2,748 linear miles of barriers at a cost of over $4.05 billion ($5.44 billion in 2010 dollars). Three states and the District of Columbia have not constructed noise barriers. Ten SDOTs account for approximately sixty-two percent (62%) of total barrier length and sixty-nine percent (69%) of total barrier cost. The type of information requested can be found in 23 CFR 772.13(f).
The previously distributed listing can be found at
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that FHWA will submit the collection of information described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
Please submit comments by March 3, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID 2020-0028 by any of the following methods:
Mary Huie, 202-493-3460,
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that FHWA will submit the collection of information described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
Please submit comments by March 3, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID 2020-0029 by any of the following methods:
Carolyn Winborne-James, 202-493-0353, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Real Estate Services, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Similarly, FHWA established the Excellence in Right-of-Way Awards Program to honor the use of innovative practices and outstanding achievements associated with highway improvement projects as it relates to the Right-of-Way program. The goal of the program is to showcase exemplary and innovative projects, programs, initiatives, and practices that successfully integrate the consideration of the Right-of-Way program along with the association of the acquisition of land required to construct transportation facilities.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for nine individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on November 30, 2020. The exemptions expire on November 30, 2022.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On November 18, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for nine individuals from the hearing standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR 73591). The public comment period ended on December 18, 2020, and no comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with § 391.41(b)(11).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing found in § 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5—1951.
This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Based upon its evaluation of the nine renewal exemption applications, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the hearing requirement in § 391.41(b)(11).
As of November 18, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR 73591):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0102, FMCSA-2014-0104, FMCSA-2016-0002, FMCSA-2017-0057, FMCSA-2017-0061, or FMCSA-2018-0135. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 30, 2020, and will expire on November 30, 2022.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of denials.
FMCSA announces its decision to deny applications from 37 individuals who requested an exemption from the vision standard in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
FMCSA received applications from 37 individuals who requested an exemption from the vision standard in the FMCSRs.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and concluded that granting these exemptions would not provide a level of safety that would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained by complying with § 391.41(b)(10).
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on medical reports about the applicants' vision, as well as their driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency.
The Agency has determined that these applicants do not satisfy the eligibility criteria or meet the terms and conditions of the Federal exemption and granting these exemptions would not provide a level of safety that would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained by complying with § 391.41(b)(10). Therefore, the 37 applicants in this notice have been denied exemptions from the physical qualification standards in § 391.41(b)(10).
Each applicant has, prior to this notice, received a letter of final disposition regarding his/her exemption request. Those decision letters fully outlined the basis for the denial and constitute final action by the Agency. This notice summarizes the Agency's recent denials as required under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) by periodically publishing names and reasons for denial.
The following 18 applicants had no experience operating a CMV:
The following 10 applicants did not have 3 years of experience driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:
The following three applicants did not have 3 years of recent experience driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:
The following four applicants were denied for multiple reasons:
The following applicant has not had stable vision for the preceding 3-year period:
The following applicant drove interstate while restricted to intrastate driving:
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 53 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirements in one eye.
Each group of renewed exemptions are applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before March 3, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6480, Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7006, Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7363, Docket No. FMCSA-2000-8398, Docket No. FMCSA-2001-10578, Docket No. FMCSA-2002-12294, Docket No. FMCSA-2002-13411, Docket No. FMCSA-2004-19477, Docket No. FMCSA-2005-23238, Docket No. FMCSA-2006-24783, Docket No. FMCSA-2006-26066, Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0021, Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0266, Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0340, Docket No. FMCSA-2009-0011, Docket No. FMCSA-2009-0303, Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0187, Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0354, Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0385, Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0276, Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0379, Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0161, Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0339, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0174, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0002, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0003, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0006, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0007, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0299, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0300, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0301, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0027, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0031, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0033, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0210, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0212, Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0207, or Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0209 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the “Public Participation” portion of the
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this notice (Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2002-13411; FMCSA-2004-19477; FMCSA-2005-23238; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2006-26066; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2008-0340; FMCSA-2009-0011; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0354; FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0339; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0299; FMCSA-2014-0300; FMCSA-2014-0301; FMCSA-2016-0027; FMCSA-2016-0031; FMCSA-2016-0033; FMCSA-2016-0210; FMCSA-2016-0212; FMCSA-2018-0207; FMCSA-2018-0209), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA can contact you if there
To submit your comment online, go to
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8
FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
The 53 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of their exemptions from the vision standard in § 391.41(b)(10), in accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend each exemption for a renewable 2-year period.
Interested parties or organizations possessing information that would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a driver.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each of the 53 applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision standard (see 64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20245; 65 FR 20251; 65 FR 45817; 65 FR 57230; 65 FR 77066; 65 FR 78256; 66 FR 16311; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 66966; 67 FR 38311; 67 FR 46016; 67 FR 57266; 67 FR 57267; 67 FR 76439; 68 FR 1654; 68 FR 10298; 68 FR 13360; 68 FR 69434; 69 FR 26921; 69 FR 52741; 69 FR 64806; 69 FR 71098; 70 FR 2705; 70 FR 7545; 70 FR 12265; 70 FR 44946; 70 FR 53412; 70 FR 74102; 71 FR 5105; 71 FR 19600; 71 FR 27033; 71 FR 32184; 71 FR 32185; 71 FR 41311; 71 FR 53489; 71 FR 63379; 72 FR 1051; 72 FR 1054; 72 FR 1056; 72 FR 7812; 72 FR 11426; 73 FR 11989; 73 FR 15567; 73 FR 27015; 73 FR 28186; 73 FR 42403; 73 FR 51336; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR 63047; 73 FR 75803; 73 FR 76439; 73 FR 78421; 73 FR 78423; 74 FR 6209; 74 FR 6689; 74 FR 8302; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 60022; 75 FR 4623; 75 FR 9480; 75 FR 13653; 75 FR 19674; 75 FR 22176; 75 FR 27623; 75 FR 38602; 75 FR 47883; 75 FR 52062; 75 FR 63257; 75 FR 64396; 75 FR 72863; 75 FR 77492; 75 FR 77949; 75 FR 79079; 75 FR 79083; 75 FR 79084; 76 FR 2190; 76 FR 4413; 76 FR 5425; 76 FR 9859; 76 FR 11215; 76 FR 67248; 76 FR 75942; 76 FR 79761; 77 FR 543; 77 FR 15184; 77 FR 17107; 77 FR 17108; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 29447; 77 FR 41879; 77 FR 52389; 77 FR 52391; 77 FR 60010; 77 FR 64582; 77 FR 74273; 77 FR 74734; 77 FR 75496; 77 FR 76166; 78 FR 800; 78 FR 1919; 78 FR 8689; 78 FR 11731; 78 FR 12817; 78 FR 12822; 78 FR 67452; 78 FR 67460; 78 FR 76707; 79 FR 1908; 79 FR 10606; 79 FR 14333; 79 FR 14571; 79 FR 17642; 79 FR 18391; 79 FR 22003; 79 FR 23797; 79 FR 27043; 79 FR 28588;
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of March and are discussed below. As of March 1, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 44 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20245; 65 FR 20251; 65 FR 45817; 65 FR 57230; 65 FR 77066; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 66966; 67 FR 38311; 67 FR 46016; 67 FR 57266; 67 FR 57267; 68 FR 1654; 68 FR 69434; 69 FR 26921; 69 FR 52741; 69 FR 64806; 69 FR 71098; 70 FR 2705; 70 FR 7545; 70 FR 44946; 70 FR 53412; 70 FR 74102; 71 FR 5105; 71 FR 19600; 71 FR 27033; 71 FR 32184; 71 FR 32185; 71 FR 41311; 71 FR 53489; 71 FR 63379; 72 FR 1051; 72 FR 1054; 72 FR 1056; 73 FR 11989; 73 FR 15567; 73 FR 27015; 73 FR 28186; 73 FR 42403; 73 FR 51336; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR 63047; 73 FR 75803; 73 FR 76439; 73 FR 78421; 73 FR 78423; 74 FR 6209; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 60022; 75 FR 4623; 75 FR 9480; 75 FR 13653; 75 FR 19674; 75 FR 22176; 75 FR 27623; 75 FR 38602; 75 FR 47883; 75 FR 52062; 75 FR 63257; 75 FR 64396; 75 FR 72863; 75 FR 77492; 75 FR 79079; 75 FR 79083; 75 FR 79084; 76 FR 2190; 76 FR 4413; 76 FR 5425; 76 FR 67248; 76 FR 75942; 76 FR 79761; 77 FR 543; 77 FR 15184; 77 FR 17107; 77 FR 17108; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 29447; 77 FR 41879; 77 FR 52389; 77 FR 52391; 77 FR 60010; 77 FR 64582; 77 FR 74273; 77 FR 74734; 77 FR 75496; 77 FR 76166; 78 FR 800; 78 FR 1919; 78 FR 11731; 78 FR 12817; 78 FR 67452; 78 FR 67460; 78 FR 76707; 79 FR 1908; 79 FR 10606; 79 FR 14333; 79 FR 14571; 79 FR 17642; 79 FR 18391; 79 FR 22003; 79 FR 23797; 79 FR 27043; 79 FR 28588; 79 FR 35212; 79 FR 37842; 79 FR 38659; 79 FR 38661; 79 FR 41735; 79 FR 46300; 79 FR 47175; 79 FR 53514; 79 FR 56104; 79 FR 73397; 79 FR 73686; 79 FR 73687; 79 FR 74169; 80 FR 603; 80 FR 2473; 80 FR 3723; 80 FR 8751; 80 FR 9304; 80 FR 18693; 80 FR 67481; 81 FR 15401; 81 FR 20433; 81 FR 20435; 81 FR 26305; 81 FR 28138; 81 FR 52514; 81 FR 59266; 81 FR 66724; 81 FR 68098; 81 FR 71173; 81 FR 72664; 81 FR 74494; 81 FR 80161; 81 FR 81230; 81 FR 86063; 81 FR 90050; 81 FR 91239; 81 FR 94013; 81 FR 96165; 81 FR 96196; 82 FR 12683; 82 FR 13043; 82 FR 13048; 83 FR 2306; 83 FR 6919; 83 FR 15195; 83 FR 28325; 83 FR 28332; 83 FR 34661; 83 FR 53724; 83 FR 56140; 83 FR 56902; 84 FR 2309; 84 FR 2311; 84 FR 2314; 84 FR 16320):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-19477; FMCSA-2005-23238; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2006-26066; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2008-0340; FMCSA-2009-0011; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0354; FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0339; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0299; FMCSA-2014-0300; FMCSA-2016-0027; FMCSA-2016-0031; FMCSA-2016-0033; FMCSA-2016-0210; FMCSA-2016-0212; FMCSA-2018-0207. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 1, 2021, and will expire on March 1, 2023.
As of March 4, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following individual has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (67 FR 76439; 68 FR 10298; 70 FR 7545; 72 FR 7812; 74 FR 6689; 76 FR 9859; 78 FR 8689; 80 FR 7678; 82 FR 13043; 84 FR 16320):
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2002-13411. The exemption is applicable as of March 4, 2021, and will expire on March 4, 2023.
As of March 7, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (80 FR 6162; 80 FR 20562; 82 FR 13043; 84 FR 16320):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0301. The exemptions are applicable as of March 7, 2021, and will expire on March 7, 2023.
As of March 9, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2018-0209. The exemptions are applicable as of March 9, 2021, and will expire on March 9, 2023.
As of March 23, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following three individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (65 FR 78256; 66 FR 16311; 67 FR 76439; 68 FR 10298; 68 FR 13360; 70 FR 7545; 70 FR 12265; 72 FR 7812; 72 FR 11426; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR 63047; 74 FR 6689; 74 FR 8302; 75 FR 77949; 76 FR 9859; 76 FR 11215; 78 FR 8689; 78 FR 12822; 80 FR 15859; 82 FR 13043; 84 FR 16320):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2002-13411; FMCSA-2008-0266. The exemptions are applicable as of March 23, 2021, and will expire on March 23, 2023.
The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions: (1) Each driver must undergo an annual physical examination (a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a certified medical examiner (ME), as defined by § 390.5, who attests that the driver is otherwise physically qualified under § 391.41; (2) each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the ME at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file or keep a copy of his/her driver's qualification if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 53 exemption applications, FMCSA renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the vision requirement in § 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 20 individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on January 22, 2021. The exemptions expire on January 22, 2023.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On December 16, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of applications from 20 individuals requesting an exemption from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR 81553). The public comment period ended on January 15, 2021, and two comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with § 391.41(b)(11).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing found in § 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5—1951.
This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
FMCSA received two comments in this proceeding. Of the two comments received, one was in support of issuing the exemptions and the other was outside the scope of this notice.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on current medical information and literature, and the 2008 Evidence Report, “Executive Summary on Hearing, Vestibular Function and Commercial Motor Driving Safety.” The evidence report reached two conclusions regarding the matter of hearing loss and CMV driver safety: (1) No studies that examined the relationship between hearing loss and crash risk exclusively among CMV drivers were identified; and (2) evidence from studies of the private driver's license holder population does not support the contention that individuals with hearing impairment are at an increased risk for a crash. In addition, the Agency reviewed each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial Driver's License Information System, for commercial driver's license (CDL) holders, and inspections recorded in the Motor Carrier Management Information System. For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviewed the driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency. Each applicant's record demonstrated a safe driving history. Based on an individual assessment of each applicant that focused on whether an equal or greater level of safety is likely to be achieved by permitting each of these drivers to drive in interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in intrastate commerce, the Agency believes the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they do not pose a risk to public safety.
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the hearing standard in § 391.41(b)(11) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1) Each driver must report any crashes or accidents as defined in § 390.5; (2) each driver must report all citations and convictions for disqualifying offenses under 49 CFR 383 and 49 CFR 391 to FMCSA; and (3) each driver is prohibited from operating a motorcoach or bus with passengers in interstate commerce. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. In addition, the exemption does not exempt the individual from meeting the applicable CDL testing requirements.
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 20 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the hearing standard, § 391.41(b)(11), subject to the requirements cited above:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 10 individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on December 16, 2020. The exemptions expire on December 16, 2022.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On December 11, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 10 individuals from the hearing standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR 80219). The public comment period ended on January 11, 2021, and no comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with § 391.41(b)(11).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing found in 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5—1951.
This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Based upon its evaluation of the 10 renewal exemption applications, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the hearing requirement in § 391.41 (b)(11).
As of December 11, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following 10 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR 80219):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2018-0136. Their exemptions were applicable as of December 16, 2020, and will expire on December 16, 2022.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt three individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers have “no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.” The exemptions enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on January 11, 2021. The exemptions expire on January 11, 2023.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On December 11, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of applications from three individuals requesting an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) and requested comments from the public (85
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with § 391.41(b)(8).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy found in § 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.
In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory criteria
FMCSA received one comments in this proceeding. The comment received was outside the scope of this notice.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on the 2007 recommendations of the Agency's Medical Expert Panel (MEP). The Agency conducted an individualized assessment of each applicant's medical information, including the root cause of the respective seizure(s) and medical information about the applicant's seizure history, the length of time that has elapsed since the individual's last seizure, the stability of each individual's treatment regimen and the duration of time on or off of anti-seizure medication. In addition, the Agency reviewed the treating clinician's medical opinion related to the ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV with a history of seizure and each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial Driver's License Information System for commercial driver's license (CDL) holders, and interstate and intrastate inspections recorded in the Motor Carrier Management Information System. For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviewed the driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). A summary of each applicant's seizure history was discussed in the December 11, 2020,
These three applicants have been seizure-free over a range of eight to 19 years while taking anti-seizure medication and maintained a stable medication treatment regimen for the last 2 years. In each case, the applicant's treating physician verified his or her seizure history and supports the ability to drive commercially.
The Agency acknowledges the potential consequences of a driver experiencing a seizure while operating a CMV. However, the Agency believes the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they are unlikely to have a seizure and their medical condition does not pose a risk to public safety.
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition in § 391.41(b)(8) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1) Each driver must remain seizure-free and maintain a stable treatment during the 2-year exemption period; (2) each driver must submit annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the stability of treatment and that the driver has remained seizure-free; (3) each driver must undergo an annual medical examination by a certified ME, as defined by § 390.5; and (4) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a copy of his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the three exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition, § 391.41(b)(8), subject to the requirements cited above:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 26 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided below.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On November 30, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 26 individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR 76652). The public comment period ended on December 30, 2020, and one comment was received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation § 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in § 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. An anonymous individual submitted a comment in support of the Agency's decision to grant the exemptions.
Based on its evaluation of the 26 renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA confirms its decision to exempt the following drivers from the vision requirement in § 391.41(b)(10).
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of January and are discussed below. As of January 3, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 13 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (65 FR 45817; 65 FR 77066; 67 FR 71610; 69 FR 64810; 71 FR 66217; 73 FR 35201; 73 FR 46973; 73 FR 48275; 73 FR 54889; 73 FR 74565; 75 FR 44051; 75 FR 77949; 75 FR 77951; 77 FR 15184; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 46153; 77 FR 68202; 77 FR 74730; 79 FR 21996; 79 FR 38659; 79 FR 46153; 79 FR 51643; 79 FR 53514; 79 FR 64001; 79 FR 65759; 79 FR 73689; 81 FR 1474; 81 FR 48493; 81 FR 59266; 81 FR 70251; 81 FR 74494; 81 FR 81230; 81 FR 90050; 81 FR 96165; 81 FR 96178; 81 FR 96180; 83 FR 28325; 83 FR 34661; 83 FR 40638; 83 FR 45750; 83 FR 53724; 83 FR 53727; 83 FR 56137; 83 FR 60954; 84 FR 2305; 84 FR 2311; 84 FR 2326; 84 FR 2328):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0231; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010; FMCSA-2016-0033; FMCSA-2016-0209; FMCSA-2016-0347; FMCSA-2018-0017; FMCSA-2018-0018; FMCSA-2018-0208. Their exemptions were applicable as of January 3, 2021, and will expire on January 3, 2023.
As of January 9, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (71 FR 63379; 72 FR 1051; 73 FR 78423; 75 FR 79083; 77 FR 74734; 79 FR 73686; 81 FR 96165; 84 FR 2311):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2006-26066. Their exemptions were applicable as of January 9, 2021, and will expire on January 9, 2023.
As of January 10, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (79 FR 73397; 80 FR 9304; 81 FR 96165; 84 FR 2311):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0299. Their exemptions were applicable as of January 10, 2021, and will expire on January 10, 2023.
As of January 12, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2004-18885; FMCSA-2010-0354. Their exemptions were applicable as of January 12, 2021, and will expire on January 12, 2023.
As of January 14, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following individual has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (69 FR 64806; 70 FR 2705; 72 FR 1056; 73 FR 76439; 75 FR 79084; 77 FR 75496; 79 FR 74169; 81 FR 96165; 84 FR 2311):
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2004-19477. The exemption was applicable as of January 14, 2021, and will expire on January 14, 2023.
As of January 17, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following individual has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (67 FR 68719; 68 FR 2629; 69 FR 71100; 72 FR 1053; 73 FR 76440; 75 FR 80887; 77 FR 76167; 79 FR 74168; 81 FR 96165; 84 FR 2311):
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2002-12844. The exemption was applicable as of January 17, 2021, and will expire on January 17, 2023.
As of January 31, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (69 FR 17263; 69 FR 31447; 70 FR 44946; 71 FR 43557; 73 FR 42403; 75 FR 38602; 75 FR 72863; 76 FR 2190; 78 FR 800; 80 FR 603; 81 FR 96165; 84 FR 2311):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2004-17195; FMCSA-2010-0354. Their exemptions were applicable as of January 31, 2021, and will expire on January 31, 2023.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR) described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
Please send your comments by March 3, 2021. OMB must receive your comments by this date in order to act quickly on the ICR.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Monique Riddick, Commercial Enforcement and Investigations Division, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, West Building, 6th Floor, MC-ECC, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Telephone: 202-366-8045; email
As a result of Title IV, Subtitle B of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59) and a petition for rulemaking from the American Moving and Storage Association,
Section 4212 of SAFETEA-LU directs the Secretary to require HHG brokers to provide potential shippers with information throughout the various stages of their interaction. The below summarizes the information collection required of the HHG broker at the various interaction stages between the HHG broker and shippers as laid out by 49 CFR part 371, subpart B.
When HHG shippers are looking to procure HHG brokers' services, brokers must collect the following information and display it on their websites and solicitation materials:
• Their physical address (49 CFR 371.107(a));
• Their U.S. DOT number(s) and MC number (49 CFR 371.107(b));
• A statement indicating that they will not transport the shipper's goods but will only arrange for goods to be transported by a registered motor carrier (49 CFR 371.107(c));
• If brokers choose to publish rates on their websites or solicitation materials, the broker must also publish a statement that the rates are based on a motor carrier's publicly available rates (49 CFR 371.107(d));
• If brokers choose to publish a list of motor carriers with whom they work, the list must only be a list of motor carriers with whom brokers have agreements (49 CFR 371.107(e)); and
• Brokers must publish information regarding their cancellation policies, including information on deposits and refunds (49 CFR 371.117(a)).
When HHG shippers make reasonable requests seeking additional information
1. A list of motor carriers with whom it has agreements (49 CFR 371.109(a)); and
2. A statement indicating the broker is not a motor carrier and that the broker is only arranging transportation of the shipper's goods (49 CFR 371.109(b)).
When HHG shippers request estimates, the HHG brokers must collect the following information and distribute it to HHG shippers and/or store the information received:
1. FMCSA's published information materials: (1) “Ready to Move?—Tips for a Successful Interstate Move” and (2) “Your Rights and Responsibilities When you Move” (49 CFR 371.111(a)(1),(a)(2), & (a)(3));
2. A document signed by the shipper, showing he/she received FMCSA's published information material (49 CFR 371.111(c));
3. A written estimate based on the motor carrier's physical survey of household items (49 CFR 371.113(a)), with estimates based on published motor carrier rates (49 CFR 371.113(b));
4. If applicable, the shipper must sign a “Waiver” receipt, showing he/she has waived his/her right to a physical survey of his/her household items by the motor carrier. The HHG broker must collect the “Waiver” receipt and store the record (49 CFR 371.113(b)).
Should the shipper find the shipping estimate and broker services reasonable and wish to contract the broker's services, the two parties must enter into an agreement. At this point, it is standard practice for shippers to pay either a deposit or make full payment. However, before collecting any payment, the broker must collect the following information and distribute it to the HHG shipper:
• An agreement document with required specifications as laid out by 49 CFR 371.115; and
• An agreement document which highlights the broker's and/or motor carrier's refund policy for cancellation of agreements (49 CFR 371.117(a)).
The information provided in phases I, II, III, and IV supports the requirements of 49 CFR part 371, subpart B, and the Department's secondary mission to support HHG consumer protection.
The complete collection of information required by the referenced final rule assists HHG shippers in their business dealings with interstate HHG brokers. The information collected is used by prospective HHG shippers to make informed decisions about contracts, services ordered, executed, and settled. The HHG broker is often the earliest contact for individual HHG shippers in an interstate moving transaction; therefore, it makes sense for HHG brokers to provide HHG shippers with consumer protection information.
FMCSA revises the total annual burden to 72,808 hours. This is a 2,723 annual burden hour increase from the currently approved 70,085 annual burden estimate. This increase is due to the following: (1) The previous iteration did not account for the time brokers use to complete a “waiver” should shippers choose to waive their rights to a physical survey, if applicable to a shipper, as required by 49 CFR 371.113(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3); (2) the previous iteration did not clarify a reproducible frequency formula used to calculate the number of times brokers collect information and submit information to shippers. To produce a reproducible frequency formula, the updated information collection introduced the concept of “phases,” which created a frequency number based on business interactions between brokers and shippers as explained above; and (3) FMCSA's records indicate the number of household goods brokers increased from 543 brokers to 652 brokers.
In addition to the above, an adjustment was made to this ICR revision from the previous ICR renewal with regards to the annual hourly burden estimate for broker “transaction records”(49 CFR 371.3). The annual hourly burden was removed from this ICR revision because the burden is for the collection of information that the broker would ordinarily record for other standard business practices such as tax purposes. As a result, the associated annual hourly burden estimate is removed. The previous ICR accounted 32,580 annual burden hours
Issued under the authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1.87.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, FinCEN invites comments on the proposed renewal, without change, of a currently approved information collections found in existing Bank Secrecy Act regulations. Specifically, the regulations require dealers in foreign exchange and brokers or dealers in securities to secure and maintain a record of the taxpayer identification number for individuals for whom a transaction or brokerage account is opened, or for whom a line of credit is extended, subject to certain exceptions. The regulations also require that the dealers in foreign exchange and brokers or dealers in securities retain originals or copies of specified documents relating to account and transaction records. Although no changes are proposed to the information collections
Written comments are welcome, and must be received on or before April 2, 2021
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
•
•
Please submit comments by one method only. Comments will also be taken into account in FinCEN's review of existing regulations, consistent with by Treasury's 2011 Plan for Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules. All comments submitted in response to this notice will become a matter of public record. Therefore, you should submit only information that you wish to make publicly available.
The FinCEN Regulatory Support Section at 1-800-767-2825 or electronically at
The legislative framework generally referred to as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) consists of the Currency and Financial Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, as amended by the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act) (Pub. L. 107-56) and other legislation. The BSA is codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314 and 5316-5332, and notes thereto, with implementing regulations at 31 CFR Chapter X.
The BSA authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury,
31 CFR 1022.410(a) requires a dealer in foreign exchange to make and maintain a record of the taxpayer identification number of certain persons for whom a transaction account is opened or a line of credit is extended, within 30 days of opening such an account or extending such a line of credit, or longer if the person has applied for a taxpayer identification or social security number. A dealer in foreign exchange must also maintain a list containing the names, addresses, and account or credit line numbers of those persons from whom it has been unable to secure such information despite reasonable efforts. A dealer in foreign exchange need not attempt to secure such information if the person is an agency or instrumentality of a Federal, state, local, or foreign government using an account for public funds, one of several categories of aliens that are not permanent resident aliens, or an unincorporated subordinate unit of a tax exempt organization covered by a group exemption letter.
Under 31 CFR 1022.410(b), a dealer in foreign exchange must also retain the original or a copy of nine types of documents: (1) Statements of accounts from banks, including documents representing the entries reflected on such statements; (2) daily work records, including documents needed to identify and reconstruct currency transactions with customers and foreign banks; (3) a record of each exchange of currency involving transactions in excess of $1,000, including the customer's name and address (and passport or tax identification number unless received by mail or common carrier), the date and amount of the transaction, and the currency name, country, and total amount of each foreign currency; (4) signature cards or other documents evidencing signature authority over each deposit or security account, containing specified items of information about the customer (including a record of the actual owner of the account if customer accounts are maintained in a code name); (5) each item, including checks, drafts, and transfers of credit, of more than $10,000 remitted or transferred to a person, account, or place outside the United States; (6) a record of each receipt of currency, other monetary instruments, investment securities and checks, and of each transfer of funds or credit, of more than $10,000 received on any one occasion directly and not through a domestic financial institution, from any person, account, or place outside the United States; (7) records prepared or received by the dealer in foreign exchange in the ordinary course of business that would be needed to reconstruct an account and trace a check in excess of $100 deposited in such an account through its internal recordkeeping system to its depository institution, or to supply a description of such a deposited check; (8) a record of the name, address and taxpayer identification number of any person presenting a certificate of deposit for payment, as well as a description of the instrument and the date of the transaction; and (9) a system of books and records that enables the dealer in foreign exchange to prepare an accurate balance sheet and income statement. To the extent that these records include originals or copies of checks, drafts, monetary instruments, investment securities, or other similar instruments, copies of front and back of such instruments must generally be retained.
Until October 1, 2003, 31 CFR 1023.410(a) required a broker or dealer in securities to make a record of certain information. Until October 1, 2008, a broker or dealer in securities was required to maintain all such records, as well as a list containing the names, addresses, and account or credit line numbers of those persons from whom it had been unable to secure the required information despite reasonable efforts. The customer identification program requirement for brokers or dealers in
Under 31 CFR 1023.410(b), a broker or dealer in securities must retain an original or copy of: (1) Each document granting signature or trading authority over each customer's account; (2) a record of each remittance or transfer of funds, currency, checks, other monetary instruments, investment securities, or credit, of more than $10,000 to a person, account, or place outside the United States; (3) a record of each receipt of currency, other monetary instruments, investment securities, or checks, and of each transfer of funds or credit, of more than $10,000 on any one occasion, not through a domestic financial institution, from any person, account, or place outside the United States; and (4) each record described in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (9) of 17 CFR 240.17a-3(a), covering records to be made by certain exchange members, brokers and dealers as identified in 17 CFR 240.17a-3. To the extent that these records include originals or copies of checks, drafts, monetary instruments, investment securities, or other similar instruments, copies of front and back of such instruments must generally be retained.
• Renewal without change of a currently approved information collection.
• Propose for review and comment a renewal of the portion of the PRA burden that has been subject to notice and comment in the past (the “traditional annual PRA burden”).
• Propose for review and comment a future expansion of the scope of the PRA burden (the “future annual PRA burden”).
The breakdown of financial institutions, by type, covered by this notice is reflected in Table 1 below:
Each dealer in foreign exchange must make and maintain a record of the taxpayer identification number of certain persons for whom a transaction account is opened or a line of credit is extended within 30 days of opening such an account or extending such a line of credit, or longer if the person has applied for a taxpayer identification or social security number. A dealer in foreign exchange must also maintain a list containing the names, addresses, and account or credit line numbers of those persons from whom it has been unable to secure such information despite reasonable efforts.
Each dealer in foreign exchange must retain the original or a copy of nine types of documents as described in
Due to the challenges of obtaining the total number of such records required to be maintained by dealers in foreign exchange under 31 CFR 1022.410, in its most recent control number renewal, FinCEN estimated that the annual recordkeeping burden per dealer in foreign exchange for these requirements was 16 hours.
923 dealers in foreign exchange
As noted above, brokers or dealers in securities have no recordkeeping responsibilities under this provision; the obligation on brokers or dealers in securities to maintain customer identification programs pursuant to 31 CFR 1023.220 has effectively replaced these responsibilities.
Each broker or dealer in securities must retain an original or copy of certain types of documents as described in Section I—Statutory and Regulatory Provisions above.
Due to the challenges of obtaining the total number of such records required to be maintained by brokers or dealers in securities, in its most recent control number renewal, FinCEN estimated that the annual recordkeeping burden per broker or dealer in securities for these requirements was 100 hours.
3,640 brokers or dealers in securities
FinCEN's estimate of the traditional annual PRA burden, therefore, is 378,768 hours, as detailed in Table 2 below:
To calculate the hourly costs of the burden estimate, FinCEN identified three roles and corresponding staff positions involved in maintaining records as required by 31 CFR 1022.410 and 1023.410: (i) General supervision (providing process oversight); (ii) direct supervision (reviewing operational-level work and cross-checking all or a sample of the work product against supporting documentation); and (iii) clerical work (engaging in recordkeeping).
FinCEN calculated the fully-loaded hourly wage for each of these three roles by using the median wage estimated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS),
FinCEN estimates that,
The cost of each hour of burden, broken down by role, to produce and maintain records as outlined in 31 CFR
The total estimated cost of the traditional annual PRA burden is $14,014,416, as reflected in Table 5 below:
In the future, FinCEN will include the burden and cost for each type of recordkeeping requirement covered by the regulations being renewed. The future burden estimate will also include estimates of the number of transactions conducted annually per financial institution, which trigger each recordkeeping requirement.
Each dealer in foreign exchange must make and maintain a record of the taxpayer identification number of certain persons for whom a transaction account is opened or a line of credit is extended within 30 days of opening such an account or extending such a line of credit, or longer if the person has applied for a taxpayer identification or social security number. A dealer in foreign exchange must also maintain a list containing the names, addresses, and account or credit line numbers of those persons from whom it has been unable to secure such information despite reasonable efforts. In order to more accurately estimate the related PRA burden in the future, FinCEN intends to obtain a better understanding of the volume of transaction accounts and lines of credit opened per year by dealers in foreign exchange.
As described in greater detail in Section I—Statutory and Regulatory Provisions above, each dealer in foreign exchange must retain the original or a copy of nine types of documents. In order to more accurately estimate the related PRA burden in the future, FinCEN intends to obtain a better understanding of the volume of transactions that trigger such recordkeeping requirements per year by dealers in foreign exchange.
Each broker or dealer in securities must retain an original or copy of certain types of documents as described in Section I—Statutory and Regulatory Provisions above. In order to more accurately estimate the related PRA burden in the future, FinCEN intends to obtain a better understanding of the volume of transactions that trigger such recordkeeping requirements per year by brokers or dealers in exchange.
FinCEN does not have the information needed to estimate the number of annual transactions that trigger each recordkeeping requirement being renewed in this notice. For that reason, FinCEN is relying on estimates used in prior renewals of these OMB control numbers and the applicable regulations. FinCEN further recognizes that after receiving public comments as a result of this notice, future annual PRA hourly burden and cost estimates may vary significantly. In order to arrive at more precise estimates of net BSA hourly burden and cost, FinCEN intends to conduct more granular studies in the near future, regarding the types and volume of transactions conducted annually, which trigger each recordkeeping requirement, and the time it takes to collect and record the information required for each recordkeeping requirement.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Records required to be retained under the BSA must be retained for five years.
FinCEN invites comments on any aspect of the traditional annual PRA burden, as set out in Part 2 of this notice. In particular, FinCEN seeks comments on the adequacy of: (i) FinCEN's assumptions underlying its estimate of the burden; (ii) the estimated number of hours required by each portion of the burden; and (iii) the organizational levels of the financial institution engaged in each portion of the burden, their estimated hourly remuneration, and the estimated proportion of participation by each role. FinCEN encourages commenters to include any publicly available sources for alternative estimates or methodologies.
FinCEN invites comments on any aspect of the criteria for a future estimate of the annual PRA burden, as set out in Part 3 of this notice.
FinCEN invites comments on the most appropriate and comprehensive means to question financial institutions about the annual hourly burden and cost attributable solely to the regulations covered by this notice (
FinCEN seeks comments from the public regarding any questions we should consider posing in future notices, in addition to the specific questions for comment outlined directly below. Also, due to the difficulty involved in estimating the number of transaction accounts, lines of credit, and transactions that trigger recordkeeping requirements, as described in this notice, FinCEN welcomes any suggestions as to how to derive these estimates by using publicly available financial information.
• On average, how many transaction accounts or lines of credit does your dealer in foreign exchange open/extend annually, which trigger the recordkeeping requirement in 31 CFR 1022.410(a)?
• On average, how long does it take your dealer in foreign exchange to collect and retain the records required to be maintained when you open a transaction account or extend a line of credit?
• On average, how often does your dealer in foreign exchange conduct each of the transactions described in 31 CFR 1022.410(b), as explained in further detail in Section I—Statutory and Regulatory Provisions?
• On average, how long does it take your dealer in foreign exchange to collect and retain the records required to be maintained when you conduct one of the transactions described in 31 CFR 1022.410(b)?
• On average, how often does your broker or dealer in securities conduct each of the transactions described in 31 CFR 1023.410(b), as explained in further detail in Section I—Statutory and Regulatory Provisions?
• On average, how long does it take your broker or dealer in securities to collect and retain the records required to be maintained when you conduct one of the transactions described in 31 CFR 1023.410(b)?
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (i) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (iii) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (iv) 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; and (v) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice of meeting; change.
In the
The meeting will be held Wednesday, February 10, 2021.
Antoinette Ross at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4110.
Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Special Projects Committee will be held Wednesday, February 10, 2021, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Antoinette Ross. For more information please contact Antoinette Ross at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4110, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at the website:
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice of meeting; change.
In the
The meeting will be held Wednesday, February 10, 2021.
Fred Smith at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 317-3087.
Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee will be held Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Fred Smith. For more information please contact Fred Smith at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 317-3087, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at the website:
February 4, 2021, from Noon to 2:00 p.m., Eastern time.
This meeting will be accessible via conference call and via Zoom Meeting and Screenshare. Any interested person may call (i) 1-929-205-6099 (U.S. Toll) or 1-669-900-6833 (U.S. Toll) or (ii) 1-877-853-5247 (U.S. Toll Free) or 1-888-788-0099 (U.S. Toll Free), Meeting ID: 988 1565 4454, to listen and participate in this meeting. The website to participate via Zoom Meeting and Screenshare is
This meeting will be open to the public.
The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Education and Training Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement. The subject matter of this meeting will include:
The Subcommittee Chair will welcome attendees, call the meeting to order, call roll for the Subcommittee, confirm whether a quorum is present, and facilitate self-introductions.
The UCR Executive Director will verify the publication of the meeting notice on the UCR website and distribution to the UCR contact list via email followed by the subsequent publication of the notice in the
The Subcommittee Agenda will be reviewed, and the Subcommittee will consider adoption.
Draft minutes from the December 17, 2020 Subcommittee meeting via teleconference will be reviewed. The Subcommittee will consider action to approve.
The Subcommittee will discuss and provide updates on development of the Audit Module.
The Subcommittee will discuss and provide comments on the interviews conducted with Audit subject matter experts.
The Subcommittee Chair will call for any other items the committee members would like to discuss.
The Subcommittee Chair will adjourn the meeting.
The agenda will be available no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, January 28, 2021 at:
Elizabeth Leaman, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors, (617) 305-3783,
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that a virtual meeting of the Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation (the Committee) will begin and end as follows:
The virtual meeting is open to the public.
The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on the maintenance and periodic readjustment of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities.
The Committee is to assemble and review relevant information relating to the nature and character of disabilities arising during service in the Armed Forces, provide an ongoing assessment of the effectiveness of the rating schedule, and give advice on the most appropriate means of responding to the
The agenda will include, but is not limited to, briefings on the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities and on relevant earnings and losses studies.
Time will not be allocated at this virtual meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. However, interested individuals may submit a one (1) to two (2) page summary of their written statements for the Committee's review. Public statements may be received no later than February 12, 2021; for inclusion in the official meeting record. Please send these to Sian Roussel of the Veterans Benefits Administration, Compensation Service at
Members of the public who wish to obtain a copy of the agenda should contact Sian Roussel at
The call-in number for those who would like to attend the meeting is 1-800-767-1750; access code: 75937#.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that the VA National Academic Affiliations Council (Council) will meet via conference call on March 9, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. EST. The meeting is open to the public.
The purpose of the Council is to advise the Secretary on matters affecting partnerships between VA and its academic affiliates.
On March 9, 2021, the Council will receive annual training from the Advisory Committee Management Office; brief on VA modernization impact on trainee onboarding; status of VA's Electronic Health Record implementation; and update from the Strategic Academic Advisory Council (SAAC). The Council will receive public comments from 2:45 p.m. to 2:55 p.m. EST.
Interested persons may attend and/or present oral statements to the Council. The dial in number to attend the conference call is: 646-828-7666. At the prompt, enter meeting ID 161 601 0099, then press #. The meeting passcode is 590228, then press #. Individuals seeking to present oral statements are invited to submit a 1-2 page summary of their comments at the time of the meeting for inclusion in the official meeting record. Oral presentations will be limited to five minutes or less, depending on the number of participants. Interested parties may also provide written comments for review by the Council prior to the meeting or at any time, by email to
(b) The PCAST shall be composed of not more than 26 members. The Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (the “Science Advisor”) shall be a member of the PCAST. The Science Advisor, if also serving as the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, may designate the U.S. Chief Technology Officer as a member. The remaining members shall be distinguished individuals and representatives from sectors outside of the Federal Government appointed by the President. These non-Federal members shall have diverse perspectives and expertise in science, technology, and innovation.
(c) The Science Advisor shall serve as a Co-Chair of the PCAST. The President shall also designate at least one, but not more than two, of the non-Federal members to serve as a Co-Chair, or Co-Chairs, of the PCAST with the Science Advisor. The Science Advisor may designate up to three Vice Chairs of the PCAST from among the non-Federal members of the PCAST, to support the Co-Chairs in the leadership and organization of the PCAST.
(b) The PCAST shall meet regularly and shall:
(c) The PCAST shall provide advice from the non-Federal sector to the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) in response to requests from the NSTC.
(b) In consultation with the Science Advisor, the PCAST is authorized to create standing subcommittees and ad hoc groups, including technical advisory groups, to assist the PCAST and provide preliminary information directly to the PCAST.
(c) In order to allow the PCAST to provide advice and analysis regarding classified matters, the Science Advisor may request that members of the PCAST, its standing subcommittees, or ad hoc groups, who do not hold a current clearance for access to classified information, receive security clearance and access determinations pursuant to Executive Order 12968 of August 2, 1995 (Access to Classified Information), as amended, or any successor order.
(d) The Department of Energy shall provide such funding and administrative and technical support as the PCAST may require, to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.
(e) Members of the PCAST shall serve without any compensation for their work on the PCAST, but may receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons serving intermittently in the government service (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707).
(f) Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), may apply to the PCAST, any functions of the President under that Act, except that of reporting to the Congress, shall be performed by the Secretary of Energy, in accordance with the guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
(a) I will host an early Leaders' Climate Summit aimed at raising climate ambition and making a positive contribution to the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) and beyond.
(b) The United States will reconvene the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, beginning with the Leaders' Climate Summit. In cooperation with the members of that Forum, as well as with other partners as appropriate, the United States will pursue green recovery efforts, initiatives to advance the clean energy transition, sectoral decarbonization, and alignment of financial flows with the objectives of the Paris Agreement, including with respect to coal financing, nature-based solutions, and solutions to other climate-related challenges.
(c) I have created a new Presidentially appointed position, the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, to elevate the issue of climate change and underscore the commitment my Administration will make toward addressing it.
(d) Recognizing that climate change affects a wide range of subjects, it will be a United States priority to press for enhanced climate ambition and integration of climate considerations across a wide range of international fora, including the Group of Seven (G7), the Group of Twenty (G20), and fora that address clean energy, aviation, shipping, the Arctic, the ocean, sustainable development, migration, and other relevant topics. The Special Presidential Envoy for Climate and others, as appropriate, are encouraged to promote innovative approaches, including international multi-stakeholder initiatives. In addition, my Administration will work in partnership with States, localities, Tribes, territories, and other United States stakeholders to advance United States climate diplomacy.
(e) The United States will immediately begin the process of developing its nationally determined contribution under the Paris Agreement. The process will include analysis and input from relevant executive departments and agencies (agencies), as well as appropriate outreach to domestic stakeholders. The United States will aim to submit its nationally determined contribution in advance of the Leaders' Climate Summit.
(f) The United States will also immediately begin to develop a climate finance plan, making strategic use of multilateral and bilateral channels and institutions, to assist developing countries in implementing ambitious emissions reduction measures, protecting critical ecosystems, building resilience against the impacts of climate change, and promoting the flow of capital toward climate-aligned investments and away from high-carbon investments. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination with the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, shall lead a process to develop this plan, with the participation of the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Chief Executive Officer of the United States International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Director of the United States Trade and Development Agency, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the head of any other agency providing foreign assistance and development financing, as appropriate. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit the plan to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, within 90 days of the date of this order.
(g) The Secretary of the Treasury shall:
(h) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Energy shall work together and with the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Chief Executive Officer of the DFC, and the heads of other agencies and partners, as appropriate, to identify steps through which the United States can promote ending international financing of carbon-
(a) Agencies that engage in extensive international work shall develop, in coordination with the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, and submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, within 90 days of the date of this order, strategies and implementation plans for integrating climate considerations into their international work, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. These strategies and plans should include an assessment of:
(b) The Director of National Intelligence shall prepare, within 120 days of the date of this order, a National Intelligence Estimate on the national and economic security impacts of climate change.
(c) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Commerce, through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the heads of other agencies as appropriate, shall develop and submit to the President, within 120 days of the date of this order, an analysis of the security implications of climate change (Climate Risk Analysis) that can be incorporated into modeling, simulation, war-gaming, and other analyses.
(d) The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall consider the security implications of climate change, including any relevant information from the Climate Risk Analysis described in subsection (c) of this section, in developing the National Defense Strategy, Defense Planning Guidance, Chairman's Risk Assessment, and other relevant strategy, planning, and programming documents and processes. Starting in January 2022, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall provide an annual update, through the National Security Council, on the progress made in incorporating the security implications of climate change into these documents and processes.
(e) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall consider the implications of climate change in the Arctic, along our Nation's borders, and to National
(a) Membership. The Task Force shall consist of the following additional members:
(b) Mission and Work. The Task Force shall facilitate the organization and deployment of a Government-wide approach to combat the climate crisis. This Task Force shall facilitate planning and implementation of key Federal actions to reduce climate pollution; increase resilience to the impacts of climate change; protect public health; conserve our lands, waters, oceans, and biodiversity; deliver environmental justice; and spur well-paying union jobs and economic growth. As necessary and appropriate, members of the Task Force will engage on these matters with State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments; workers and communities; and leaders across the various sectors of our economy.
(c) Prioritizing Actions. To the extent permitted by law, Task Force members shall prioritize action on climate change in their policy-making and budget processes, in their contracting and procurement, and in their engagement with State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments; workers and communities; and leaders across all the sectors of our economy.
(b) The plan shall aim to use, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, all available procurement authorities to achieve or facilitate:
(c) If necessary, the plan shall recommend any additional legislation needed to accomplish these objectives.
(d) The plan shall also aim to ensure that the United States retains the union jobs integral to and involved in running and maintaining clean and zero-emission fleets, while spurring the creation of union jobs in the manufacture of those new vehicles. The plan shall be submitted to the Task Force within 90 days of the date of this order.
(b) Within 30 days of an agency's submission of an action plan, the Federal Chief Sustainability Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall review the plan to assess its consistency with the policy set forth in section 204 of this order and the priorities issued by the Office of Management and Budget.
(c) After submitting an initial action plan, the head of each agency shall submit to the Task Force and Federal Chief Sustainability Officer progress reports annually on the status of implementation efforts. Agencies shall make progress reports public and post them on the agency website, to the extent consistent with applicable law. The heads of agencies shall assign their respective agency Chief Sustainability Officer the authority to perform duties relating to implementation of this order within the agency, to the extent consistent with applicable law.
(d) To assist agencies and State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments, communities, and businesses in preparing for and adapting to the impacts of climate change, the Secretary of Commerce, through the Administrator
(b) Agency heads conducting infrastructure reviews shall, as appropriate, consult from an early stage with State, local, and Tribal officials involved in permitting or authorizing proposed infrastructure projects to develop efficient timelines for decision-making that are appropriate given the complexities of proposed projects.
(b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall:
(c) The Secretary of Commerce, through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, shall initiate efforts in the first 60 days from the date of this order to collect input from fishermen, regional ocean councils, fishery management councils, scientists, and other stakeholders on how to make fisheries and protected resources more resilient to climate change, including changes in management and conservation measures, and improvements in science, monitoring, and cooperative research.
(a) Membership. The Interagency Working Group shall consist of the following additional members:
(b) Mission and Work.
(c) Consultation. Consistent with the objectives set out in this order and in accordance with applicable law, the Interagency Working Group shall seek the views of State, local, and Tribal officials; unions; environmental justice organizations; community groups; and other persons it identifies who may have perspectives on the mission of the Interagency Working Group.
(d) Administration. The Interagency Working Group shall be housed within the Department of Energy. The Chairs shall convene regular meetings of the Interagency Working Group, determine its agenda, and direct its work. The Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Chairs, shall designate an Executive Director of the Interagency Working Group, who shall coordinate the work of the Interagency Working Group and head any staff assigned to the Interagency Working Group.
(e) Officers. To facilitate the work of the Interagency Working Group, the head of each agency listed in subsection (a) of this section shall assign a designated official within the agency the authority to represent the agency on the Interagency Working Group and perform such other duties relating to the implementation of this order within the agency as the head of the agency deems appropriate.
“(a) There is hereby created within the Executive Office of the President a White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council (Interagency Council). The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall serve as Chair of the Interagency Council.
“(b) Membership. The Interagency Council shall consist of the following additional members:
“(c) At the direction of the Chair, the Interagency Council may establish subgroups consisting exclusively of Interagency Council members or their designees under this section, as appropriate.
“(d) Mission and Work. The Interagency Council shall develop a strategy to address current and historic environmental injustice by consulting with the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council and with local environmental justice leaders. The Interagency Council shall also develop clear performance metrics to ensure accountability, and publish an annual public performance scorecard on its implementation.
“(e) Administration. The Office of Administration within the Executive Office of the President shall provide funding and administrative support for the Interagency Council, to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. To the extent permitted by law, including the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535), and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Department of Labor, the Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency shall provide administrative support as necessary.
“(f) Meetings and Staff. The Chair shall convene regular meetings of the Council, determine its agenda, and direct its work. The Chair shall designate an Executive Director of the Council, who shall coordinate the work of the Interagency Council and head any staff assigned to the Council.
“(g) Officers. To facilitate the work of the Interagency Council, the head of each agency listed in subsection (b) shall assign a designated official within the agency to be an Environmental Justice Officer, with the authority to represent the agency on the Interagency Council and perform such other duties relating to the implementation of this order within the agency as the head of the agency deems appropriate.”
(b) The Interagency Council shall, within 120 days of the date of this order, submit to the President, through the National Climate Advisor, a set of recommendations for further updating Executive Order 12898.
(a) Membership. Members shall be appointed by the President, shall be drawn from across the political spectrum, and may include those with knowledge about or experience in environmental justice, climate change, disaster preparedness, racial inequity, or any other area determined by the President to be of value to the Advisory Council.
(b) Mission and Work. The Advisory Council shall be solely advisory. It shall provide recommendations to the White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council established in section 220 of this order on how to increase the Federal Government's efforts to address current and historic environmental injustice, including recommendations for updating Executive Order 12898.
(c) Administration. The Environmental Protection Agency shall provide funding and administrative support for the Advisory Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. Members of the Advisory Council shall serve without either compensation or reimbursement of expenses.
(d) Federal Advisory Committee Act. Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), may apply to the Advisory Council, any functions of the President under the Act, except for those in section 6 of the Act, shall be performed by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with the guidelines that have been issued by the Administrator of General Services.
(a) The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality shall, within 6 months of the date of this order, create a geospatial Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool and shall annually publish interactive maps highlighting disadvantaged communities.
(b) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall, within existing appropriations and consistent with applicable law:
(c) The Attorney General shall, within existing appropriations and consistent with applicable law:
(d) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall, consistent with applicable law and within existing appropriations:
(e) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall, in consultation with the National Climate Advisor, within existing appropriations, and within 100 days of the date of this order, publish a report identifying the climate strategies and technologies that will result in the most air and water quality improvements, which shall be made public to the maximum extent possible and published on the Office's website.
(b) In developing the recommendations, the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the National Climate Advisor shall consult with affected disadvantaged communities.
(c) Within 60 days of the recommendations described in subsection (a) of this section, agency heads shall identify applicable program investment funds based on the recommendations and consider interim investment guidance to relevant program staff, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.
(d) By February 2022, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in coordination with the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, the Administrator of the United States Digital Service, and other relevant agency heads, shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law, publish on a public website an annual Environmental Justice Scorecard detailing agency environmental justice performance measures.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.