Commodity Credit Corporation
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Patent and Trademark Office
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
National Institutes of Health
Coast Guard
Drug Enforcement Administration
Copyright Royalty Board
Federal Aviation Administration
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.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), United States Department of Agriculture.
Final rule.
This final rule adopts, with minor changes, an interim rule published in the
Effective: February 4, 2021.
Carrie Lindig, (202) 720-1882, or
The 2018 Farm Bill reauthorized and amended ACEP. The 2018 Farm Bill authorized the use of the existing regulations that had been implemented under the Agricultural Act of 2014 for the remainder of FY 2019 to the extent that those regulations were consistent with the 2018 Farm Bill changes.
On January 6, 2020, CCC published an interim rule with request for comments in the
ACEP helps farmers and ranchers preserve their agricultural land and restore, protect, and enhance wetlands on eligible lands. The program has two components:
(1) Agricultural land easements (ACEP-ALE); and
(2) Wetland reserve easements (ACEP-WRE).
The Secretary of Agriculture delegated authority to the Chief, NRCS, to administer ACEP.
Through ACEP-ALE, NRCS provides matching funds to eligible entities that are State, Tribal, and local governments, and nongovernmental organizations with farm and ranch land protection programs, to purchase agricultural land easements. Agricultural land easements are permanent or for the maximum duration authorized by State law.
Through ACEP-WRE, NRCS protects wetlands on eligible lands by purchasing an easement directly from eligible landowners or entering into 30-year contracts on acreage owned by Indian Tribes, in each case providing for the restoration, enhancement, and protection of wetlands and associated lands. Wetland reserve easements may be permanent, 30-years for acreage owned by Indian Tribes, or the maximum duration authorized by State law.
Participation in either ACEP-ALE or ACEP-WRE is voluntary.
The interim rule:
• Incorporated changes to the ACEP purposes to limit nonagricultural uses that negatively affect agricultural uses and conservation values;
• Added language to specify general monitoring responsibilities under ACEP-ALE and ACEP-WRE;
• Removed references to the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) as the 2018 Farm Bill revised RCPP as a stand-alone program, which is now in 7 CFR part 1464;
• Added definitions to reflect 2018 Farm Bill changes: Buy-protect-sell (BPS) transaction, monitoring report, wetland restoration, easement administration action, grazing management plan, and nonindustrial private forest land;
• Removed definitions for: Active agricultural production, forest land, forest land of statewide importance, and projects of special significance;
• Made changes to easement administration actions, including specifying the criteria that apply to each type of easement administrative actions;
• Made revisions to the environmental markets section in response to the 2018 Farm Bill;
• Removed the requirement that an eligible entity provide evidence at the time of application that they have funds available to meet the minimum cash contribution requirement;
• Eliminated the requirement that land with a certain amount of forest land have a forest management plan;
• Replaced the term “proposed” with “permitted” in text about the types of rights-of-way, infrastructure development, or other adjacent land uses whose impacts may cause land to be considered ineligible;
• Specified that under a BPS transaction, the eligible entity for meeting payment eligibility requirements (highly erodible land and wetland conservation, and Adjusted Gross Income (AGI)) is the landowner unless the eligible entity sells the fee title to a qualified farmer or rancher prior to, or at the time of, the easement closing, in which case the farmer or rancher purchaser must meet payment eligibility requirements;
• To address BPS transactions, specified that eligible lands owned by the eligible entity may be eligible for enrollment if the land is owned, on a transitional basis, to protect the land through securing an agricultural land easement on the land and to transfer fee title ownership to a farmer or rancher;
• Specified eligibility requirements related to BPS transactions;
• Specified that NRCS will consider eligible entity cash contribution toward the easement purchase price and measures to increase agricultural viability as ranking criteria;
• Specified that appropriate terms and conditions must be included in the easement deed to address items agreed to by the eligible entity as a matter of ranking and basis for selection for funding;
• Removed the requirement for the eligible entity to contribute its own cash resources in an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount of the Federal share;
• Specified the incurred costs by the eligible entity associated with securing a deed to the easement that may be included in the calculation of the non-Federal share, and that the source and limit of other costs that may be included in the calculation of the non-Federal share;
• Removed reference to the availability of waivers for grasslands of special environmental significance since the specific eligible entity cash contribution requirement was removed;
• Added specificity to the right of enforcement conveyed to NRCS under the terms of an agricultural land easement;
• Removed the requirement that the agricultural land easement be subject to an ACEP-ALE plan;
• Specified the terms and conditions required by statute that must be addressed if the eligible entity chooses to allow subsurface mineral development on the land subject to the agricultural land easement;
• Revised the requirement for a conservation plan on highly erodible cropland;
• Provided that an eligible entity may include terms and conditions in the ACEP-ALE deed that are intended to keep the land subject to the easement under farmer or rancher ownership;
• Removed the stand-alone section regarding ACEP-ALE plans and captured in other sections the provisions related to development of required conservation plans or development of ACEP-ALE plans as agreed-to by the eligible entity;
• Incorporated two new categories under which an eligible entity may demonstrate that they meet the ACEP-ALE certification requirements and revised the criteria to require a minimum of 10 agricultural land easements under ACEP-ALE, or predecessor NRCS easement programs, for all eligible entities seeking certification;
• Specified the circumstances under which NRCS may exercise its right of enforcement under ACEP-ALE, including its right of inspection;
• Increased the percent of acres of total cropland in a county that may be subject to an ACEP-WRE easement to 15 percent;
• Removed the requirement for NRCS to seek input from the Secretary of the Interior at the local level in the determination of eligible land;
• Included water quality as an additional priority along with the priority placed on acquiring wetland reserve easements based on the value of the easement for protecting and enhancing habitat for migratory birds and other wildlife;
• Specified that grazing under reserve grazing rights wetland reserve easement or 30-year contract must comply with a wetlands reserve plan of operations (WRPO) developed by NRCS, which may include a grazing management plan component, and identified that the plan may be reviewed and modified as necessary, at least every 5 years; and
• Included new provisions related to the evaluation and authorization of compatible uses on wetland reserve easements, including that in evaluating and considering compatible uses NRCS will consider whether the use will facilitate the practical administration and management of the easement or contract area and ensure that the use furthers the functions and values for which the land was enrolled.
The interim rule 60-day comment period ended March 6, 2020, and was extended to March 20, 2020, to provide the public an opportunity to consider the January 24, 2020, correction. Seventy commenters, including individuals, organizations, and agencies, submitted comments to regulations.gov. NRCS reviewed the input from these 70 commenters in response to the rule and identified 576 comments contained within these 70 entries. NRCS reviewed these 576 comments and categorized and summarized them according to the topics identified below. The topics that generated the greatest response were on ALE ranking, ALE BPS transactions, and definitions.
Overall, the comments expressed general support for the changes made in the interim rule. Six comments were not relevant to the ACEP interim rule. Ten comments expressed general support for the regulation and three comments criticized the regulation in general. These comments did not include any recommendations for change.
NRCS appreciates all comments submitted and thanks each person and organization who expressed an opinion related to ACEP or the interim rule. NRCS will continue the endeavor to improve its customer service and the equitable dispensation of benefits under ACEP.
In this rule, the comments have been organized alphabetically by topic. The topics include:
• ALE Buy-Protect-Sell Transactions;
• ALE Contribution Requirements;
• ALE Deed Requirements and Terms;
• ALE Entity Certification;
• ALE Land Eligibility Issues;
• ALE Planning;
• ALE Program Requirements;
• ALE Ranking;
• Definitions;
• Easement Administration Actions;
• Environmental Markets;
• Fund Allocations;
• Landowner Eligibility—AGI Limitation Waiver;
• Program Administration; and
• WRE Issues.
This final rule responds to the comments received by the public comment deadline and makes minor clarifying and related changes.
BPS transactions are arrangements under ALE, first authorized under the 2018 Farm Bill, between NRCS and an eligible entity where the entity owns or will own the land prior to the acquisition of the agricultural land easement on the property, and the eligible entity either:
(1) Sells fee title to the land to a farmer or rancher prior to or at easement closing; or
(2) Holds fee title at the time the agricultural land easement is conveyed on that land, and transfers ownership of the land subject to the easement to a farmer or rancher not later than 3 years after the date of acquisition of the agricultural land easement.
NRCS received comments related to BPS transactions, several of which expressed support for allowing BPS transactions. Remaining comments were as follows:
A discussion of the federal income tax regulatory requirement that an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) operate for the benefit of public rather than private interests is outside the scope of both the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture and this rule. For more information about the requirements applicable to tax-exempt organizations, including those described in section 501(c)(3) of IRC, visit the IRS's Charities and Nonprofits page at
The ACEP statute requires the sale to be at “agricultural value” plus any reasonable holding costs. A sale at FMV assumes that the impact of the placement of the easement on the land will result in the highest and best use of the land being agriculture, and thus agricultural value. The alternative value, the purchase price at which the entity purchased the land, would have been at most, theoretically, FMV of the land without being encumbered by the easement. If the original purchase price of the property was less than FMV of the land encumbered with the easement, then ACEP assistance through a BPS arrangement is not necessary for the entity to have a viable transaction that would result in the same outcome and could occur without an investment of taxpayer funds.
This requirement ensures that eligible entities do not profit from the BPS transaction at the cost of the qualified farmer or rancher. The provision requiring the eligible entity to sell the property at the original purchase price, if lower than the appraised agricultural value, was similarly included to help farmers and ranchers gain access to affordable farmland. NRCS has clarified in the regulation that appraised agricultural value means agricultural value of the land. An eligible entity should seek tax or legal advice if a particular transaction, due to the entity's unique circumstances, could jeopardize its tax-exempt status. In those instances, the entity can move forward independently without ACEP assistance, especially if the entity would make a profit from the subsequent land transfer, which would negate the need for Federal funds.
No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
Additionally, NRCS recognizes that post-closing BPS transactions compete for the same ACEP funds that otherwise would be available to protect land that is already owned by a private or Tribal landowner or qualified farmer or rancher. Under a post-closing BPS transaction, until transfer to a qualified farmer or rancher takes place, the intended purposes of ACEP for which the Federal funds have been invested, are not fully realized. If the property is not ultimately transferred, then those Federal funds have been rendered unavailable for 5 to 6 years during which time they could have been used to protect another property that may have met ACEP purposes from the outset. Twelve months was chosen to ensure appropriate stewardship of Federal funds. No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
NRCS therefore states in the ACEP regulation that, to be eligible for a BPS transaction, the land must be subject to conditions that necessitate the ownership of the parcel by the eligible entity on a transitional basis prior to the creation of an agricultural land easement, and that these conditions may include land subject to an “imminent threat of development, including, but not limited to, planned or approved conversion of grasslands to more intensive agricultural uses.” Other conditions may also satisfy that requirement. NRCS made a slight editorial clarification in the regulation with respect to the requirement that the eligible entity must, within 12-months of the BPS agreement, have completed the initial purchase of the land or have demonstrated that completion of the purchase of the land is imminent.
No other change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
The article supplied by the respondent reaffirmed this concept by identifying cases where courts determined that the doctrine of merger was not applicable due to the transfer of an easement to a third party. Merger of title addresses the extinguishment of an easement right due to a subsequent acquisition of fee title, while the BPS transactions present issues of easement creation. In addition to these issues, the conflict of interest inherent in this type of ownership scenario, which would impact enforcement, monitoring, and management of the easement and property, would not be mitigated by including an anti-merger provision. No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
Under both the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills, NRCS may provide a Federal share that does not exceed 50 percent of the FMV of the agricultural land easement and requires the eligible entity to provide a share at least equivalent to that provided by NRCS, except in the case of grasslands of special environmental significance. For grasslands of special environmental significance, NRCS may provide a Federal share that does not exceed 75 percent of the easement FMV and the non-Federal share requirement is adjusted accordingly. The 2018 Farm Bill removed the 50-percent cash contribution requirement on the part of the eligible entity and identified permissible sources of the non-Federal share. NRCS received the following comments.
Additionally, given that an eligible entity's contribution may be related to cash resources expended for the purchase of the land prior to the easement transaction, NRCS has clarified in the regulation that for BPS transactions, part of the non-Federal share provided by an eligible entity may include that portion of the fair market value of the agricultural land easement that is not provided as the Federal share.
NRCS received comment related to the topic of ALE deed requirements and deed terms as follows:
NRCS requires a parcel-by-parcel determination because impervious surface limitations are site-specific. NRCS will not approve a blanket waiver or grant eligible entities a right to create blanket waivers for a greater impervious surface limit.
However, there is an existing waiver option available that may have been underutilized. Specifically, when an eligible entity has a waiver process consistent with NRCS limitations and it is based on parcel-by-parcel determinations made by the entity, the entity may request authority from NRCS to use its own process. In this case, separate individual parcel waivers from NRCS would not be necessary.
No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
• A requirement that native plants be used to remediate subsurface mining impacts;
• A requirement that involves State technical committees when determining impact of mineral development;
• That NRCS seek guidance on timing and responsibility for the development of the subsurface development plan; and
• That NRCS provide flexibility in the identification of de minimis gravel extraction sites.
While the State technical committee can provide input on the impact of mineral development to particular land uses or locations in the State, such input would be inappropriate on an individual easement basis.
The eligible entity is responsible for providing the subsurface mineral development plan to NRCS, which must be approved by NRCS prior to initiation of the mineral development activity, as set forth in § 1468.25(d)(7)(v).
The de minimis gravel extraction matter is not a regulatory issue but the comment responds to text that exists in the current minimum deed terms.
NRCS would like to clarify that de minimis gravel extraction is through surface methods and therefore not encompassed by the subsurface mineral deed. Additionally, the current minimum deed terms authorize such de minimis gravel extraction for on-farm purposes. No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
NRCS has not included any cross references to the various sections which relate to the United States right of enforcement in the definition itself since such cross-referencing is unnecessary.
Agricultural land easements acquired under the 2018 Farm Bill are not required to have or be subject to an ALE plan. NRCS enforces highly erodible land conservation plans on highly erodible cropland as required by the ACEP-ALE statute; however, NRCS does not otherwise identify in the regulation the enforcement of an ALE plan.
No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
NRCS received comment related to ALE entity certification as follows:
NRCS received comment related to ALE land eligibility as follows:
NRCS specifically requested public comment in the interim rule on whether RCPP or HFRP could protect lands on which NIPF is the predominant use at levels beyond the scope of ACEP-ALE. Regarding the two-third limitation, NRCS cannot authorize parcels that are 100 percent NIPF because statutory eligibility criteria is phrased as NIPF contributing to the economic viability of an offered parcel or serving as a buffer to protect land from development. Thus, the eligibility of NIPF is in relationship to other eligible land. This has long been NRCS's interpretation of this eligibility criterion under ACEP-ALE and its predecessor Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program. Congress specifically rejected language that would have expanded eligibility in the 2018 Farm Bill. NRCS concurs that the availability of other USDA easement programs that specifically protect forested lands warrants the continued focus of ACEP-ALE more broadly on other agricultural lands. No change is made to the regulation in response to this issue.
• A request that confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) not be eligible for an ALE-funded easement;
• A comment addressing the ineligibility criteria related to on-site and off-site conditions;
• A comment commending NRCS for including criteria related to permitted
• A comment requesting that NRCS broaden the definition of access and the eligibility requirements so that air access can qualify; and
• A comment requesting additional clarification as to whether a farmer or rancher can participate in both ALE and Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
Legal access to agricultural land easements is critical to the ability of the eligible entity, and NRCS, under its right of enforcement, to monitor and enforce the terms of the easement and ensure that program purposes are achieved. Effective monitoring and enforcement ultimately require ground inspection and verification. Access to an easement that can only be achieved by aircraft would require both the eligible entity and NRCS to maintain, in perpetuity, aircraft that can provide personnel access to monitor and land on the easement property and would require the landowner to maintain, in perpetuity, a landing strip or helipad on the property. NRCS does not maintain its own aircraft for easement monitoring purposes and cannot evaluate the safety and suitability of aircraft owned by the eligible entity or the landowner's landing strip or helipad. All lands that do not have sufficient legal, physical access are ineligible to receive Federal funds under ACEP, including those that are only accessible by air.
The 2018 Farm Bill specifies that a farmer or rancher who owns eligible land subject to an agricultural land easement may enter into a CRP contract. Determinations of land eligibility for enrollment in CRP are under the purview of FSA and we have therefore shared the comment with FSA. No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
NRCS received comment related to ALE planning and ALE plans as follows:
NRCS received comment related to ALE program requirements as follows:
NRCS received comment related to ALE ranking as follows:
• Recommended consideration of State and local tax incentives be added to this factor;
• Recommended NRCS prioritization of landowner donation in the ranking; and
• Agreed with including the eligible entity's cash contribution in the ranking.
• Recommended expanding the ranking criteria to prioritize applications that increase opportunities for historically underserved farmers;
• Supported the maintenance of agricultural viability as a ranking criterion; including supporting its inclusion as both a national and State ranking factor;
• Suggested that such inclusion is duplicative;
• Recommended that agricultural viability be included in the national ranking criteria; and
• Recommended that succession planning be removed from the ranking criteria.
The existence of State ranking criteria enables States to develop nuanced approaches to address long-term agricultural viability, which may include more specific identification or prioritization of certain types of succession plans or succession planning strategies. NRCS does not wish to limit agricultural landowners' choices or restrict who could be involved in succession planning. Such specificity is not necessary in the regulation itself.
NRCS includes in the regulatory definition of a farm or ranch succession plan strategies that create opportunities for historically underserved landowners. NRCS also includes a State ranking criterion related to the multifunctional benefits of farm and ranch land protection, of which social and economic considerations may be included.
No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
Comment regarding median county average farm size refers to the national ranking criteria that considers the ratio of the size of the parcel compared to the average farm size in the county. As identified in the regulation, the USDA Census of Agriculture is the data source for this national ranking criterion; the
No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
NRCS received comment related to the definitions in the ACEP interim rule as follows:
NRCS received comment related to easement administration actions as follows:
• Recommending that NRCS remove the 10-percent limitation on easement administration actions so that an easement modification or exchange action would just need to meet one of the two thresholds: (1) The action provide equal or greater conservation functions and values and (2) equal or greater economic values;
• Recommending removal of the standard of no net loss of easement acres required for easement subordination, modification, or exchange actions; and
• Recommending a change to the definition of easement termination to acknowledge compensation that may be owed to other interest holders in a conservation easement.
It is a statutory requirement that an easement modification or exchange action must meet both thresholds (equal or greater conservation value and equal or greater economic value).
As to the threshold for an easement subordination, modification, or exchange to result in no net loss of easement acres, NRCS believes, based on long-standing experience, that the existing standard ensures that the public investment in conservation easements endures for the life of the easement and that NRCS is able to make credible determinations of equal or greater conservation and economic value as required by statute. The definition of easement termination addresses only the United States' rights or interests in an easement, including that the United States must be fully compensated for the termination of such rights and interests that are held by the United States. The easement termination language does not address or affect compensation that may be owed to other interest holders.
No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
NRCS received comment related to ACEP fund allocations as follows:
NRCS received comment related to the AGI limitation waiver as it affects landowner eligibility to enroll in ACEP as follows:
NRCS received comment on the topic of program administration as follows:
• Encouraging NRCS to adopt the “Active River Area Concept” to its management scheme;
• Proposing that all easements go through a plant and plant community survey by a botanist prior to enrollment;
• Seeking confirmation that NRCS would not enter into agreements with entities who would preclude forested riparian buffers;
• Recommending that NRCS recognize specifically intensive rotational grazing as one of the best management tools; and
• Recommending that diverse native plant mixes be prioritized in ACEP wetland and grassland restoration and management plans.
• Require landowners to assume responsibility for operation and maintenance of easements;
• Provide sufficient staffing to meet customer service needs;
• Concern over the authorization of permanent easements;
• Make publicly available information related to easement enrollments such as acres enrolled, soil classification of land, and before and after land use;
• Condition ACEP so that all funded efforts achieve consistency with State water quality standards and salmon recovery plan habitat objectives; and
• Review easement deed terms at least every 100 years to ensure consistency with existing conditions.
NRCS staffing is not a part of this rulemaking, but the agency will continue providing the highest quality customer service and program implementation with its resources.
Permanent easements are authorized and prioritized by statute.
As NRCS collects data, the agency generates multiple reports on a variety of impacts, which are typically made available to the public upon request.
NRCS will consider the recommendation regarding consistency with water quality standards and recovery plan habitat objectives as it continues to evaluate and refine ranking and eligibility criteria.
Review of easement deed terms at least every 100 years is beyond the scope of current regulation and policy.
No change is made to the regulation in response to these issues.
• Recommending that NRCS acknowledge source water protection as a goal of ACEP;
• Adding discussion about how source water protection priorities will be included in the implementation of ACEP and other NRCS conservation programs;
• Addressing how ACEP will be included in accounting for overall source water expenditures by publishing a plan for comment;
• Adding source water protection in the ACEP ranking criteria;
• Ensuring adequate attention given to source water protection at State technical committees; and
• Recommending that NRCS address how spatial data related to source water areas will intersect with ACEP.
NRCS received comment related to ACEP-WRE topics as follows:
In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking be published in the
• To be made as an interim rule effective on publication, with an opportunity for notice and comment;
• Exempt from the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. ch. 35); and
• To use the authority under 5 U.S.C. 808 related to congressional review.
Consistent with the use of the authority under 5 U.S.C. 808 related to Congressional review for the immediate effect date of the interim rule, this rule is also effective on the date of publication in the
Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” and Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as significant under Executive Order 12866 and therefore, OMB has reviewed this rule. The costs and benefits of this rule are summarized below. The full regulatory impact analysis is available on
Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. In addition to the substantive comments NRCS received on the interim rule, NRCS invited public comments on how to make the rule easier to understand. NRCS has incorporated these recommendations for improvement where appropriate. NRCS responses to public comment are described in more detail above.
One of the most significant ACEP changes in the 2018 Farm Bill is to the existing contribution requirements for the non-Federal share under ACEP-ALE. Previously, there were only two sources of non-Federal contribution—the entity's cash resources towards the purchase and the donation by the entity—with cash resources towards the purchase required for half of the non-Federal contribution. The 2018 Farm Bill eliminated the requirement for cash resources towards the purchase and allows the entity to consider other costs, previously not included, toward the non-Federal match. This change adds flexibility for eligible entities to meet the non-Federal share requirement by no longer specifying a minimum cash contribution amount to be provided by the eligible entity and allowing the total of the non-Federal share to be comprised of a charitable donation or qualified conservation contribution from the private landowner. It also includes provisions for costs related to securing the easement to be included in the calculation of the non-Federal share. While removing a potential hurdle to entity participation, the additional flexibility is not intended to supersede the conservation benefits possible under ACEP.
There are six states and one territory (Alabama, Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Missouri, North Dakota, and Puerto Rico) that currently have no enrollment in ACEP-ALE. This may have been due to a lack of available financial resources for an eligible entity to meet the minimum cash contribution requirement or may be due to a lack of entities that meet the eligibility requirements to participate in ACEP-ALE. The changes to the non-Federal share requirements may result in increased ACEP-ALE enrollments in areas where enrollment has been limited due to a lack of financial resources available for entities that meet the ACEP-ALE eligibility requirements. To address these statutory changes, in this final, we eliminated a specified minimum cash contribution amount and incorporated provisions for considering costs related to securing the easement. These changes are applicable to all eligible entities in all States and as a result, it is anticipated that the amount of the Federal contribution toward ACEP-ALE easements will increase by 8 to 10 percentage points.
Another change under the 2018 Farm Bill provides NRCS with authority to enter into legal arrangements with eligible entities to conduct BPS transactions under ACEP-ALE. Under a BPS transaction, NRCS may provide ACEP-ALE cost-share assistance to an eligible entity for the purchase of an agricultural land easement on private or Tribal agricultural land owned on a transitional basis by an eligible entity when the ownership of that land will be timely transferred to a qualified farmer or rancher. BPS transactions are intended to help farmers and ranchers acquire agricultural land they could not otherwise afford and to protect agricultural land that may have otherwise been developed or removed from agricultural production.
NRCS continues to have the discretion to rank and prioritize projects and to select individual applications based on their ability to achieve program purposes and to assess and determine the appropriate allocation of funds for the acquisition of agricultural land and wetland easements. The 2018 Farm Bill does not limit NRCS's discretion to determine the allocation of funds between ACEP-WRE and ACEP-ALE. The relative emphasis NRCS places on these two program components depends on State and national priorities, environmental impacts, and local demand. It is anticipated that enrollment in ACEP will be consistent with historic enrollment trends.
Land enrolled in ACEP-WRE easements produces onsite and offsite environmental benefits. Those include: Restoring and protecting high value wetlands; controlling sheet and rill erosion as lands are restored from cropland to wetlands and associated habitats; restoring, enhancing, and protecting habitat for fish and wildlife, including threatened and endangered species and migratory birds; improving water quality by filtering sediment and chemicals; reducing flooding and flood-related damage; recharging groundwater; protecting biological diversity; controlling invasive species with planting of native vegetation; and providing opportunities for educational, scientific, and recreational activities. Soil health and air quality are improved by reduced wind erosion, reduced soil disturbance, increased organic matter accumulation, and an increase in carbon sequestration.
For land enrolled in ACEP-ALE, the suite of conservation effects on protected grasslands are different than those on protected farmland; the impacts are not valued here as one being more beneficial than another. For example, ACEP-ALE easements on grasslands limit agricultural activities to predominantly haying and grazing, whereas easements on farmland allow crop cultivation and pasture-based agriculture. As such, farmland protection effects are derived from onsite and ecological services, as well as preserving highly productive agricultural areas from development or fragmentation. Impacts on grasslands are derived from onsite and ecological impacts as well as preventing conversion to nongrassland uses. The net conservation effects through time from farmland protection include direct access benefits (pick-your-own, agri-tourism, and nature based activities like hunting), indirect access benefits (open spaces and scenic views), and nonuse benefits (wildlife habitat and existence values). Grassland protection conservation effects include direct, indirect, and nonuse benefits, and also on-farm production gains and carbon sequestration.
The authorized level of funding for ACEP for the period of FY 2019 through 2023 is $2.25 billion (assuming future funding is set at authorized amounts). This represents an increase in ACEP average annual funding over the 2014 Farm Bill of 11 percent—from $405 million per year to $450 million per year in nominal dollars.
The regulatory impacts of ACEP funding consist of payments for the purchase of easements or real property interests; the costs incurred related to the acquisition, such as title companies, appraisers, licensed land surveyors; and the costs of restoring wetlands.
NRCS also recognizes that applicants and participants incur costs in terms of time used to gain access to ACEP. We estimate the imputed value of applicant and participant time spent in accessing the program from FY 2019 through 2023 at $1.1 million for the 5 years.
Our estimates of costs, benefits and transfers of ACEP on an annual basis are reported in Table 1. Given a 3 percent discount rate, the projected annualized real cost to producers of accessing the program is $229,000 and the projected annualized real transfers are $433 million. Conservation benefits from the easement are difficult to quantify at a national scale but have been described by studies at an individual project or watershed or local scale.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory analysis of any rule whenever an agency is required by APA or any other law to publish a proposed rule, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act because this rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking requirements of the APA and no other law requires that a proposed rule be published for this rulemaking initiative.
The environmental impacts of this rule have been considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the NRCS regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 650). NRCS conducted an analysis of the ACEP interim rule and NRCS's analysis determined there would not be a significant impact to the human environment and as a result, an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required to be prepared (40 CFR 1501.5 and 1501.6). The Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) were available for review for 30 days from the date of publication of the interim rule in the
Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” requires consultation with State and local officials that would be directly affected by proposed Federal financial assistance. The objectives of the Executive order are to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism, by relying on State and local processes for State and local government coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development. For reasons specified in the final rule-related notice regarding 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), the programs and activities in this rule are excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform.” This rule will not preempt State or local laws, regulations, or policies unless they represent an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. Before any judicial actions may be brought regarding the provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal provisions of 7 CFR part 11 are to be exhausted, consistent with 7 U.S.C. 6912(e).
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, “Federalism.” The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, except as required by law. Nor does this rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required.
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.” Executive Order 13175 requires federal agencies to consult and coordinate with Tribes on a Government-to-Government basis on policies that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects 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 USDA's Office of Tribal Relations (OTR) has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian Tribes and determined that this rule does not have significant Tribal implications that require Tribal consultations at this time for ACEP, which is a beneficial voluntary program. Notwithstanding this conclusion, OTR believes that continued focused outreach to Tribes could increase engagement in ACEP and provide assistance with water quality issues for Tribes. OTR states that NRCS has adhered to the spirit and intent of Executive Order 13175. If a Tribe requests consultation, NRCS and CCC will work with OTR to ensure meaningful consultation is provided where changes, additions, and modifications identified in this rule are not expressly mandated by the 2018 Farm Bill. Tribal consultation for this rule was included in the 2018 Farm Bill Tribal consultation held on May 1, 2019, at the National Museum of the American Indian, in Washington, DC. The portion of the Tribal consultation relative to this rule was conducted by Bill Northey, USDA Under Secretary for the Farm Production and Conservation mission area, as part of the Title I session. There were no specific comments from Tribes on ACEP during this Tribal consultation.
Additionally, NRCS held sessions with Indian Tribes and Tribal entities across the country in the spring of FY 2019 to describe the 2018 Farm Bill changes to NRCS conservation programs, obtain input about how to improve Tribal and Tribal member
As a result, approximately 50 percent of the comments received as a result of these sessions were directed to FSA, RMA, RD, and other USDA agencies, with many comments specific to hemp production and the surrounding regulations. Over 40 percent of the feedback pertained to NRCS programs. Comments listed challenges specific to Tribes that impact eligibility and inhibit access to USDA programs. None of the feedback received necessitated a change to the regulation.
NRCS will continue to work with our Tribal stakeholders to address the issues raised in order to facilitate greater technical assistance and program delivery to Indian country.
Separate from Tribal consultation and the sessions discussed above, communication and outreach efforts are in place to assure that all producers, including Tribes (or their members), are provided information about the regulation changes. Specifically, NRCS obtains input through Tribal Conservation Advisory Councils. A Tribal Conservation Advisory Council may be an existing Tribal committee or department and may also constitute an association of member Tribes organized to provide direct consultation to NRCS at the State, regional, and national levels to provide input on NRCS rules, policies, programs, and impacts on Tribes. Tribal Conservation Advisory Councils provide a venue for agency leaders to gather input on Tribal interests.
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4), requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal Governments or the private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including cost-benefits analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal mandates that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any 1 year for State, local or Tribal Governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector. UMRA generally requires agencies to consider alternatives and adopt the more cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This rule contains no Federal mandates, as defined under Title II of UMRA, for State, local, and Tribal Governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of UMRA.
The title and number of the Federal Domestic Assistance Programs in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this rule applies is: 10.931—Agricultural Conservation Easement Program.
NRCS and CCC are committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.
Agricultural, Flood Plains, Grazing lands, Natural resources, Soil conservation, and Wildlife.
Accordingly, the interim rule published January 6, 2020, at 85 FR 558, is adopted as final with the following changes:
15 U.S.C. 714b and 714c; 16 U.S.C. 3865-3865d.
The revision reads as follows:
(b) * * *
(11) Whether the land is currently enrolled in CRP in a contract that is set to expire within 1 year and is grassland that would benefit from protection under a long-term easement or is land under a CRP contract that is in transition to a covered farmer or rancher pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 3835(f);
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The eligible entity's own cash resources for payment of easement compensation to the landowner or for a buy-protect-sell transaction, the amount of the fair market value of the agricultural land easement, less the amount of the Federal share, that is provided through the conveyance of the
(iii) Where the amounts as identified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are not sufficient to meet the non-Federal share amount, the eligible entity may also include the procured costs paid by the eligible entity to a third-party for an appraisal, boundary survey, phase-I environmental site assessment, title commitment or report, title insurance, baseline reports, mineral assessments, or closing cost; and
(iv) Where the amounts as identified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section are not sufficient to meet the non-Federal share amount, the eligible entity may also include up to 2 percent of the fair market value of the agricultural land easement for easement stewardship and monitoring costs provided by the eligible entity.
(c) The eligible entity may use its own terms and conditions in the agricultural land easement deed, but the agricultural land easement deed must provide for the effective administration, management, and enforcement of the agricultural land easement by the eligible entity or its successors and assigns and must address the deed requirements as specified by this part and by NRCS in the ALE-agreement.
(d) * * *
(4) Include clauses requiring that any changes to the easement deed or easement area made after easement recordation, including any amendment to the easement deed, any subordination of the terms of the easement
The addition reads as follows:
(e) * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) The Federal share for the agricultural land easement will be provided on a reimbursable basis only, after the agricultural land easement has closed and the required documents have been provided to and reviewed by NRCS.
The revision reads as follows:
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, NRCS reserves the right to enter upon and inspect the easement area if the annual monitoring report provided by the agricultural land easement holder documenting compliance with the agricultural land easement is insufficient or is not provided annually, the United States has a reasonable and articulable belief that the terms and conditions of the easement have been violated, or to remedy deficiencies or easement violations as it relates to the conservation plan in accordance with 7 CFR part 12. Prior to its inspection, NRCS will notify the agricultural land easement holder and the landowner and provide a reasonable opportunity for the agricultural land easement holder and the landowner to participate in the inspection.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy (DOE).
Final rule.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is issuing a final rule to amend its regulations governing the maximum civil monetary penalties assessable for violations of statutes, rules, and orders within the Commission's jurisdiction. The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended most recently by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, requires the Commission to issue this final rule.
This final rule is effective February 4, 2021.
Todd Hettenbach, Attorney, Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Phone: (202) 502-8794; email:
1. In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is complying with its statutory obligation to amend the civil monetary penalties provided by law for matters within the agency's jurisdiction.
2. The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (2015 Adjustment Act),
3. The 2015 Adjustment Act defines a civil monetary penalty as any penalty, fine, or other sanction that: (A)(i) Is for a specific monetary amount as provided by Federal law; or (ii) has a maximum amount provided for by Federal law; (B) is assessed or enforced by an agency pursuant to Federal law; and (C) is assessed or enforced pursuant to an administrative proceeding or a civil action in the federal courts.
4. Under the 2015 Adjustment Act, the first step for such adjustment of a civil monetary penalty for inflation requires determining the percentage by which the U.S. Department of Labor's Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers (CPI-U) for October of the preceding year exceeds the CPI-U for October of the year before that.
5. The second step requires multiplying the CPI-U percentage increase by the applicable existing maximum civil monetary penalty.
6. The third step requires rounding the base penalty increase amount to the nearest dollar and adding that amount to the base penalty to calculate the new adjusted maximum civil monetary penalty.
7. Under the 2015 Adjustment Act, an agency is directed to use the maximum civil monetary penalty applicable at the time of assessment of a civil penalty, regardless of the date on which the violation occurred.
8. The adjustments that the Commission is required to make pursuant to the 2015 Adjustment Act are reflected in the following table:
9. Congress directed that agencies issue final rules to adjust their maximum civil monetary penalties notwithstanding the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
10. The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, requires agencies to certify that rules promulgated under their authority will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
11. This rule does not require the collection of information. The Commission is therefore not required to submit this rule for review to the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
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 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 the Commission's Online Support at (202)-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
15. For the same reasons the Commission has determined that public notice and comment are unnecessary, impractical, and contrary to the public interest, the Commission finds good cause to adopt an effective date that is less than 30 days after the date of publication in the
16. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget, that this rule is not a “major rule” as defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This final rule is being submitted to the Senate, House, and Government Accountability Office.
Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Electric power, Penalties, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By the Commission. Commissioner Clements is not participating. Commissioner Christie is not participating.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 250 and 385, chapter I, title 18,
15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
(e) * * *
(1) Any person who transports gas for others pursuant to subpart B or G of part 284 of this chapter and who knowingly violates the requirements of §§ 358.4 and 358.5 of this chapter, this section, or § 284.13 of this chapter will be subject, pursuant to sections 311(c), 501, and 504(b)(6) of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, to a civil penalty, which the Commission may assess, of not more than $1,307,164 for any one violation.
5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 16 U.S.C. 791a-825v, 2601-2645; 28 U.S.C. 2461; 31 U.S.C 3701, 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352, 16441, 16451-16463; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. 1-85 (1988); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note (1990); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note (2015).
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the Commission may assess a civil penalty of up to $23,607 for each day that the violation continues.
The current inflation-adjusted civil monetary penalties provided by law within the jurisdiction of the Commission are:
(a) 15 U.S.C. 3414(b)(6)(A)(i), Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978: $1,307,164.
(b) 16 U.S.C. 823b(c), Federal Power Act: $23,607 per day.
(c) 16 U.S.C. 825n(a), Federal Power Act: $3,083.
(d) 16 U.S.C. 825o-1(b), Federal Power Act: $1,307,164 per day.
(e) 15 U.S.C. 717t-1, Natural Gas Act: $1,307,164 per day.
(f) 49 App. U.S.C. 6(10) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,368 per offense and $69 per day after the first day.
(g) 49 App. U.S.C. 16(8) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $13,685 per day.
(h) 49 App. U.S.C. 19a(k) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,368 per day.
(i) 49 App. U.S.C. 20(7)(a) (1988), Interstate Commerce Act: $1,368 per day.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.
Final rule.
In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission amends the definition of useful thermal energy output in its regulations implementing the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to recognize the technical evolution of cogeneration.
This rule is effective April 5, 2021.
1. In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) revises its regulations (PURPA Regulations)
2. On October 15, 2020, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to modify the PURPA Regulations.
3. This final rule addresses the comments received in response to the NOPR. With one modification, we adopt the proposed revisions in the NOPR.
4. PURPA was part of a legislative package Congress enacted in 1978 to address the energy crisis then facing the country.
5. PURPA section 210 was intended to address the energy crisis by encouraging the development of QFs and thereby reducing the country's demand for traditional fossil fuels.
6. In 1980, the Commission issued Order No. 70, which promulgated rules that, as relevant here, largely remain in effect today.
7. In enacting PURPA, Congress could not, and did not, predict specific technological developments that would occur in future years but instead recognized the Commission's discretion by directing the Commission to “from time to time thereafter revise such rules as it determines necessary to encourage cogeneration.”
8. Unlike more traditional electric generation that relies on combustion of fossil fuels to produce electric energy, fuel cells convert the chemical energy in hydrogen to electric energy without combustion. This conversion has been characterized as a significant improvement in the efficiency of electric generation.
9. If the natural gas reformation equipment were instead located offsite, then waste heat (in the form of steam) from the electricity production by the fuel cell would not be available to aid the reformation process to fuel the cell. In this offsite reformation scenario, we would expect the external reformation process to require additional natural gas to be burned to create steam so that the remainder of the input natural gas could be reformed into hydrogen.
10. Stated another way, integrating the natural gas reformation process into a fuel cell generating facility results in significant “progress in the development of efficient electric energy generating technology.”
11. In the NOPR, the Commission stated that the statutory definition of
12. The Commission's PURPA Regulations define a topping-cycle cogeneration facility as a cogeneration facility in which the energy input to the facility is first used to produce useful power output and at least some of the reject heat from the power production process is then used to provide useful thermal energy.
13. Fuel cell systems with integrated natural gas reformation equipment convert the chemical energy within natural gas into electricity using a steam-methane reformation process,
14. As a cogeneration QF is one that “produces electric energy as well as steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) which are used for industrial, commercial, heating or cooling purposes,”
15. The PURPA Regulations identify three categories of useful thermal output from a topping-cycle cogenerator. They are thermal energy (1) that is “made available to an industrial or commercial process . . .; (2) that is used in a heating application . . .; or (3) that is used in a space cooling application.”
16. In recognition of technological advancements over the past 40 years and Congress's commitment to “continuing progress in the development of efficient electric energy generating technology,”
17. In proposing this change to its regulations, the Commission did not propose to revise section 292.205(d) of the PURPA Regulations, which establishes additional criteria for, in particular, new cogeneration facilities seeking to sell electric energy pursuant to PURPA section 210.
18. FuelCell Energy, which explains that it operates fuel cell systems on three continents that have generated over 10 billion kWh of power, asks the Commission to revise its regulations to encompass more than just solid oxide fuel cell systems. FuelCell Energy asserts that Bloom Energy requested that the Commission expand its current definition of a cogeneration facility so that Bloom Energy's solid oxide fuel cells qualify as a QF. FuelCell Energy argues that the Commission should revise the definition, so it can apply more broadly to any fuel cell systems that use waste heat for the reforming of fuel to produce hydrogen, and not just Bloom Energy's solid oxide fuel cell system.
19. FuelCell Energy asserts that its carbonate fuel cells use waste heat in an integrated fuel reforming process to produce hydrogen,
20. EEI requests that the Commission not move forward with this final rule, arguing that the Commission cannot expand the statutory definition of a cogeneration facility.
21. EEI also points out that the statute requires that the Commission establish regulations that ensure that:
(i) The thermal energy output of a new qualifying cogeneration facility is used in a productive and beneficial manner;
(ii) the electrical, thermal, and chemical output of the cogeneration facility is used fundamentally for industrial, commercial, or institutional purposes and is not intended fundamentally for sale to an electric utility, taking into account technological, efficiency, economic, and variable thermal energy requirements, as well as State laws applicable to sales of electric energy from a qualifying facility to its host facility; and
(iii) continuing progress in the development of efficient electric energy generating technology.
22. EEI argues that this statutory language indicates that, contrary to the Commission's statement in the NOPR, the definition of cogeneration is not “open-ended.”
23. EEI explains that the solid oxide fuel cell system described in the NOPR appears to be a self-contained reaction that is designed to produce electricity and thus is inconsistent with the statutory requirement.
24. Further, EEI explains that there is
25. EEI explains that, in adopting this provision in Order No. 70, the Commission clarified the facilities eligible for QF status did not include natural gas-fired combined-cycle combustion plants even though the sequential use of heat is used to produce more electricity.
26. EEI argues that allowing solid oxide fuel cells to now qualify as cogeneration is inconsistent with the rationale behind encouraging cogeneration under PURPA. EEI explains that, in Order No. 70, the Commission recognized that the goal was to promote conservation by recognizing that the production of electricity often creates a byproduct, thermal energy, and with minimal additional fuel the cogenerators could produce large amounts of thermal energy that could be used in other processes.
27. Finally, EEI argues that, in the past, the Commission has remained technology neutral; yet, here, the Commission is proposing to change its PURPA Regulations to endorse a specific technology. EEI requests that, instead of changing the regulations to accommodate specific technologies, the Commission evaluate new technologies under statutory criteria and the goals of PURPA to ensure a level playing field for all technologies.
28. Bloom Energy filed comments reiterating its support for the revision of the Commission's PURPA Regulations, contending that the revised definition “represents a narrow, targeted form of regulatory relief necessary to ensure `continuing progress in the development of efficient electric energy generating technology' and . . . would not impact the application of the `fundamental use test' or the existing operating standards applicable to cogeneration facilities.”
29. In this final rule, we adopt a revision to the definition of a topping-cycle cogeneration facility in section 292.202(h) of the PURPA Regulations, as proposed in the NOPR, with one modification, to include all fuel cells that use waste heat in an integrated fuel reforming process, instead of limiting the type of eligible fuel cells to only solid oxide fuel cells.
30. The statutory definition of cogeneration facilities requires only that a cogeneration facility produce “(i) electric energy, and (ii) steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) which are used for industrial, commercial, heating or cooling purposes . . . .”
31. Currently, the Commission's PURPA Regulations as adopted in 1980 provide that a topping-cycle cogeneration facility is a cogeneration facility in which the energy input to the facility is first used to produce useful power output and at least some of the reject heat from the power production process is then used to provide useful thermal energy.
32. A cogeneration facility is, per the statute, one that “produces electric energy as well as steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) which are used for industrial, commercial, heating or cooling purposes.”
33. In sum, recognizing technological advancements over the past 40 years and Congress's commitment to “continuing progress in the development of efficient electric energy generating technology,”
34. We also note that the thermal energy output,
35. FuelCell Energy argues that the NOPR proposal endorsed a specific technology, solid oxide fuel cells, instead of establishing standards that would apply to all similar fuel cells. We agree. The Commission has not endorsed specific types of solar panels, for example, in defining small power production facilities. Here, as FuelCell Energy recognizes, the focus should be on the integrated use of waste heat for reforming hydrocarbons to produce hydrogen to fuel a fuel cell, instead of the specific fuel cell technology utilized to accomplish that goal (
36. Finally, as we have noted above, we reiterate that “new” cogeneration facilities seeking to sell electric energy pursuant to PURPA section 210 must meet the additional requirements imposed by PURPA section 210 and the implementing regulations, that the “thermal energy output . . . is used in a productive and beneficial manner”
37. The Paperwork Reduction Act
While FuelCell Energy also states that, to date, it has over 250 MW of fuel cells
Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director], by email to
Please send comments concerning the collection of information and the associated burden estimates to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget [Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer]. Due to security concerns, comments should be sent directly to
38. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.
39. The changes to the PURPA Regulations do not authorize or fund particular generation that may happen to qualify as QFs, nor do they license or issue permits for operation of generation that may happen to qualify as QFs; such generation can be built and operated independent of,
40. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA)
41. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.
42. This rule directly affects cogeneration facilities, the majority of which the Commission estimates are small businesses. However, the Commission does not expect the revision to affect a substantial number of small entities. This final rule directly affects only certain QFs,
43. Accordingly, pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the Commission certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
44. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
45. 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 of this document in the docket number field.
46. 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
47. These regulations are effective April 5, 2021. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a “major rule” as defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This final rule is being submitted to the Senate, House, Government Accountability Office, and Small Business Administration.
Electric power plants, Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By the Commission. Commissioner Clements is not participating.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends part 292, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
16 U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.
(h) * * * :
(2) That is used in a heating application (
(3) That is used in a space cooling application (
(4) That is used by a fuel cell system with an integrated steam hydrocarbon reformation process for production of fuel for electricity generation.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for all navigable waters within 1400 feet of a demolition site near the eastern bank of the Grand River in Grand Haven, MI. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the controlled implosion of the J.B. Sims power plant. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated representative.
This rule is effective from 9:30 a.m. on February 5 through 10:30 a.m. on February 19, 2021. The rule will be enforced from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. on both February 5 and February 19, 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 Chief Petty Officer Jeromy Sherrill, Sector Lake Michigan Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 414-747-7148, 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 not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard not made aware of the intended demolition project until January 12, 2021, and immediate action is needed to mitigate potential safety hazards associated with the demolition process. Delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable and contrary to public interest by inhibiting the Coast Guard's ability to protect against the known and anticipated hazards.
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
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port (COTP) Lake Michigan has determined that potential safety hazards associated with the demolition of the J.B. Sims power plant
This rule establishes a safety zone from 9:30 a.m. through 10:30 a.m. on February 5 and February 19, 2021. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Grand River in Grand Haven, MI, within 1400 feet of the blast area located on the eastern bank of the river at coordinates 43.0705000° N, 086.2346667°. The date and time of the enforcement period will be announced by the COTP Lake Michigan by Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters during the implosion of structures near the river. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative.
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 characteristics of the safety zone. The safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small and is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters. This rule will prohibit entry into certain navigable waters of the Grand River in Grand Haven, MI, and is not anticipated to exceed two 2-hour periods in duration. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the COTP Lake Michigan.
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 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 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. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
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 for a total of 2 hours that will prohibit entry within 1400 feet of a blast area near the eastern bank of the Grand River for the demolition of sections of a power plant. It is categorically excluded from further
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) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
(3) The “designated representative” of the COTP is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the COTP to act on his or her behalf.
(4) Persons and vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the COTP or an on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The COTP or an on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or an on-scene representative.
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule; correction.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is making correcting amendments to the final rule published on November 30, 2020. The final rule amends the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Schedule for Rating Disabilities (“VASRD” or “rating schedule”) by revising the portion of the rating schedule that addresses the musculoskeletal system.
Effective February 7, 2021.
Gary Reynolds, M.D., Regulations Staff (211C), Compensation Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-9700. (This is not a toll-free number.)
VA is correcting its final rule, “RIN 2900-AP88; Schedule for Rating Disabilities: Musculoskeletal System and Muscle Injuries”, that was published on November 30, 2020, in the
In FR Doc. 2020-25450 appearing on page 76453 in the
Appendix C to Part 4—Alphabetical Index of Disabilities
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Notice of proposed rulemaking and rescission of a statement of policy.
In order to streamline Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) regulations and guidance, the FDIC proposes to rescind and remove from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) rules entitled
Comments must be received on or before April 5, 2021.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Please include your name, affiliation, address, email address, and telephone number(s) in your comment. All statements received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and are subject to public disclosure. You should only submit information that you wish to make publicly available.
Maureen Loviglio, Senior Staff Accountant, (202) 898-6777,
The objectives of the proposed rule are twofold. The first is to simplify the FDIC's regulations by removing unnecessary regulations, or realigning existing regulations in order to improve the public's understanding and to improve the ease of reference. The second is to promote parity between State nonmember banks and State savings associations by referring both classes of institution to the same securities offering regulation. Thus, as further detailed below in this Supplementary Information section, the FDIC proposes to rescind and remove from the CFR part 390, subpart W, applicable to State savings associations. At the same time, the FDIC proposes to rescind its current
Among other things, banks and savings associations may issue securities as part of organization
A securities issuance may require a registration statement and prospectus. If a securities issuance is exempt from registration or prospectus requirements, the issuer may be required to provide an offering document that contains varying informational and financial disclosures, depending on the exemption provision. The offering document can be used to comply with the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act. As more fully described below, the FDIC has not issued regulations regarding the content of registration statements and prospectuses, but rather, historically has provided supervisory guidance for FDIC-supervised institutions in the form of a policy statement to describe principles for preparing offering circulars.
The Dodd-Frank Act,
Pursuant to section 316(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act,
Although section 312(b)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Dodd-Frank Act
As noted, on June 14, 2011, operating pursuant to this authority, the FDIC Board reissued and re-designated certain transferring regulations of the former OTS. These transferred OTS regulations were published as new FDIC regulations in the
The Securities Act generally exempts securities issued by banks from its provisions.
The original exemption in section 3(a)(5) of the Securities Act exempted an institution “substantially all the business of which is confined to the making of loans to members. . . .”
Legislative history of the Securities Act supports this assertion.
In 1985, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) adopted the original predecessor rule to part 390, subpart W, the rules codified at 12 CFR part 563g, to “regulate an area of thrift activity currently left unregulated by an exemption in the Securities Act for securities issued by regulated thrift institutions.”
In explaining the impetus for part 563g, the FHLBB cited Louis D. Brandeis' endorsement of full disclosure: “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.”
In 1989, the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) transferred authority to regulate savings associations from the FHLB System and the FSLIC to the OTS.
As discussed above in section II.B. of this Supplementary Information section, the Dodd-Frank Act transferred the functions, powers, and duties of the former OTS relating to State saving associations to the FDIC, and named the FDIC as the “appropriate Federal banking agency” for State saving associations.
Part 563g of the former OTS's regulations addressed securities offerings.
Issuance of securities for FDIC-supervised institutions generally is addressed by State securities laws and regulations, which until fairly recently have required State-chartered institutions to follow SEC regulations. In May of 1974, the FDIC proposed a regulation that would have required State nonmember banks issuing securities to comply with disclosure and offering-circular requirements.
In proposing the regulation, the FDIC referenced sections 5 and 6 of the FDI Act,
The FDIC subsequently withdrew the proposed disclosure regulations on July 6, 1979.
In its stead, on the same day that the proposed part 340 was withdrawn, the FDIC published a statement of policy, the
In 1996, the FDIC published a new statement of policy, the
After careful review of part 390, subpart W, the FDIC has determined that the FDIC should rescind subpart W, which is applicable only to State savings associations, rescind the FDIC's 1996 Statement of Policy, propose a new regulation governing securities offering disclosures, and make other, technical amendments to certain FDIC regulations
The FDIC does not believe it is necessary to treat State savings associations differently than State nonmember banks with respect to public disclosure in connection with securities issuances. Replacing part 390, subpart W with a new regulation that applies to all FDIC-supervised institutions will ensure that the same regulations apply to both State savings associations and State nonmember banks with regard to registration statements, prospectuses, and other securities law matters, without creating excess burden on either type of insured financial institution The new requirements (discussed below in section III.C. of this Supplementary Information section) are consistent with both the requirements of part 390, subpart W and with the principles set forth in the 1996 Statement of Policy. A regulation, rather than a statement of policy, is appropriate because the FDIC's long-term experience has been that FDIC-supervised institutions are either required to follow SEC disclosure regulations by State law or voluntarily follow them and other applicable regulations as a means to comply with the Federal antifraud provisions. In the interests of regulatory transparency, the proposed regulation will make clear the FDIC's expectations for disclosures to be made in connection with the issuance of securities by FDIC-supervised institutions.
Therefore, the FDIC proposes to rescind and remove part 390, subpart W, and replace it with the proposed regulation, addressing securities offering disclosure requirements.
Since the 1996 Statement of Policy was adopted, the Securities Act was revised
In light of the Securities Act exemptions discussed above in section II.C. of this Supplementary Information section, the FDIC has relied on State laws and regulations for securities disclosure matters. However, changes to the Federal securities laws have resulted in the rescission of much of the applicable State law. The National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 (NSMIA) preempted state authority in two areas that impacted the FDIC: Offerings by companies traded on a national securities exchange,
Notwithstanding the preemption of State law, it has been the FDIC's experience that FDIC-supervised institutions follow SEC regulations voluntarily in order to comply with the anti-fraud provisions. However, given the recent regulatory changes and preemption of State law, the FDIC is proposing a regulation to address and clarify the requirements for securities offering disclosures by State nonmember banks and State savings associations. Similar to the 1996 Statement of Policy, the amended regulation parallels the requirements of the applicable SEC and OCC regulations. The proposed regulation would be located in subpart A of part 335 of the FDIC's regulations.
The proposed regulation would refer to these updated laws and regulations and also would acknowledge that under Section 312(b)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Dodd-Frank Act,
The proposed regulation would apply to securities offerings to be made by FDIC-supervised institutions in organization, FDIC-supervised institutions subject to an enforcement order that intend to issue securities, and FDIC-supervised institutions converting from a mutual to stock form of ownership. The proposed regulation would also apply to securities offerings made by the subsidiaries of State savings associations in any of the three prior scenarios.
The proposed regulation would incorporate defined terms from the Securities Act, would specifically reference SEC and OCC requirements for, and exemptions from, preparing registration statements and prospectuses, would set forth rules for offers and sales of securities by issuers, underwriters, and dealers, and would impose no new filing or other requirements on FDIC-supervised institutions. Thus, the proposed regulation eschews a recitation of the required contents of offering documents covering the securities issuances of FDIC-supervised institutions and instead requires that offering documents contain the information that would be required by the appropriate SEC form when offering securities for sale, if filing or registration were required under the Federal securities laws, and the information that would be required under the appropriate registration exemption if one applies. The proposed regulation thus seeks to treat the securities offerings of FDIC-supervised institutions more like those of other corporations falling under SEC jurisdiction and to eliminate a duplicative system of regulations and forms.
The proposed regulation also would provide requirements regarding sales practices on the premises of the issuing FDIC-supervised institution or online, and would require legends to avoid consumer confusion regarding the insured status of banking organization securities.
Consistent with existing authorities and supervisory practices, and to assess compliance with Federal antifraud provisions, the FDIC will continue to review offering documents issued by FDIC-supervised institutions in connection with FDIC-supervised institutions in organization, FDIC-supervised institutions subject to an enforcement order that intend to issue securities, and FDIC-supervised institutions converting from a mutual to stock form of ownership. Such offering circulars would be required to contain the forms and other content required by the registration exemption upon which the FDIC-supervised institution relies. The proposed rule would permit an
The proposed regulation is set forth at the end of this Supplementary Information section.
The FDIC also is proposing to make technical amendments to §§ 303.163 and 333.4 of its regulations, which address the conversion of an insured mutual state-chartered savings bank to the stock form of ownership. As described above in section II.D. of this Supplementary Information section, the former OTS issued regulations relating to mutual-to-stock conversions, part 563b, which was transferred to the OCC with respect to Federal and State savings associations as part of the Dodd-Frank Act. Sections 303.163 and 333.4 refer to the OTS when the reference should be to the OCC. Section 303.163 also refers to part 563b when the reference should be to the OCC's regulations at 12 CFR part 192. This proposal would make the necessary technical amendments.
Part 335, entitled
The FDIC invites comments on all aspects of this proposed action, and specifically invites comments on the following:
As previously discussed, the proposed rule would rescind Part 390, Subpart W which outlines public disclosure requirements in connection with securities issuances for State savings associations, make technical amendments to §§ 303.163 and 333.4, and establish a new regulation part 335, subpart B which outlines regulations relating to securities offering disclosures for all FDIC-supervised institutions. Concurrent with the adoption of these changes the FDIC plans to rescind its 1996 Statement of Policy. These actions would affect all FDIC-supervised institutions, particularly those that engage in issuing securities. According to the most recent data, the FDIC supervises 3,270 insured depository institutions.
The proposed rule, if adopted, would rescind part 390, subpart W. However, this aspect of the proposed rule is unlikely to substantively affect FDIC-supervised State savings associations. According to the most recent data, the FDIC supervised 35 State savings associations.
The establishment of a new regulation, part 335, subpart A by the proposed rule would pose several broad effects on FDIC-supervised institutions. As previously discussed, the proposed part 335, subpart A is consistent with both the requirements of part 390, subpart W and the guidance in the 1996 Statement of Policy. Therefore, the primary effect of the proposed rule is to codify in regulation what was previously guidance for FDIC-supervised institutions that are not State savings associations. Since the proposed rule largely harmonizes the FDIC's regulations with updated laws and regulations, the FDIC does not believe that the marginal effect of adopting part 335, subpart A will be significant for FDIC-supervised institutions that are not State savings associations. This aspect of the proposed rule has the benefit of simplifying and harmonizing FDIC regulations by establishing a consistent set of requirements that apply
The technical amendments to 12 CFR 303.163 and 12 CFR 333.4 are expected to clarify those regulations but not pose any substantive effect for FDIC-supervised institutions.
Finally, the FDIC believes that the proposed rule, if adopted will benefit FDIC-supervised institutions and the public by clarifying regulations and improving the ease of reference.
The FDIC has considered alternatives to the rule but believes that rescinding part 390, subpart W, rescinding the 1996 Statement of Policy, adopting part 335, subpart A, and making technical amendments to the FDIC's regulations represent the most appropriate option for FDIC-supervised institutions. As discussed previously, the Dodd-Frank Act transferred certain powers, duties, and functions formerly performed by the OTS to the FDIC. The FDIC's Board reissued and re-designated certain transferred regulations from the OTS, but noted that it would evaluate them and might later incorporate them into other FDIC regulations, amend them, or rescind them, as appropriate. The FDIC has evaluated the existing regulations relating to securities offerings of State savings associations. The FDIC considered the status quo alternative of retaining the current regulations and 1996 Statement of Policy, but chose not to do so. If the FDIC did not rescind part 390, subpart W, then State savings associations would be subject to an outdated and obsolete set of regulations while State nonmember banks would be referred to the 1996 Statement of Policy, which does not take into account subsequent changes in securities laws and regulations. Therefore, the FDIC believes maintaining the status quo would not be an acceptable option, and is proposing to rescind part 390, subpart W, to rescind the 1996 Statement of Policy, to adopt part 335, subpart A to incorporate securities offerings requirements for issuers, underwriters and dealers of securities of FDIC-supervised institutions, and to make technical amendments to existing regulations.
Another alternative available to the FDIC was to apply the regulations in part 390, subpart W to all FDIC-supervised institutions, but the FDIC chose not to do so. The FDIC believes it is important for there to be a consistent set of securities offering disclosure regulations for all FDIC supervised institutions that is reflective of updated laws and regulations, and the regulations in part 390, subpart W do not meet this standard. As noted previously, based on supervisory experience, the FDIC has found that FDIC-supervised institutions are either required to follow SEC disclosure regulations by State law or voluntarily follow them and other applicable regulations as a means to comply with the Federal antifraud provisions.
In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
The rescission and removal from FDIC regulations of part 390, subpart W and the rescission of the 1996 Statement of Policy do not create new or modify existing information collection requirements. However, certain provisions of the proposed rule contain “collection of information” requirements within the meaning of the PRA of 1995. In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, the FDIC may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for
The set of potential respondents include all. State nonmember banks and State savings associations. According to recent Call Report data, the FDIC supervises approximately 3,270 insured depository institutions,
The FDIC estimates that respondents will incur 114 labor hours on average, complying with the disclosure requirements of the proposed rule. The FDIC reviewed burden estimates for Regulation A
The estimated PRA compliance labor hours for the proposed rule are summarized in the table below, which lists the estimated annual number of responses per respondent and estimated time per response, as described above.
As the table below shows, the proposed rule would impose an estimated average annual PRA burden of 42,864 hours once the proposed rule has been adopted.
The Estimated Total Annual Burden for Revised Information Collection:
All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments on aspects of this document that may affect reporting or recordkeeping requirements and burden estimates should be sent to the addresses listed in the
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), requires that, in connection with a notice of proposed rulemaking, an agency prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small entities.
As previously discussed, the proposed rule would rescind part 390, subpart W, which outlines public disclosure requirements in connection with securities issuances for State savings associations; establish a new regulation part 335, subpart A, which outlines regulations relating to securities offering disclosures for all FDIC-supervised institutions; and make technical amendments to §§ 303.163 and 333.4. Concurrent with the adoption of these changes the FDIC plans to rescind its 1996 Statement of Policy. These actions would affect all FDIC-supervised institutions, particularly those that engage in issuing securities. According to the most recent data, the FDIC supervises 3,270 insured depository institutions, of which 2,492 are considered small banking organizations for the purposes of RFA.
The proposed rule, if adopted, would rescind part 390, subpart W, however this aspect of the proposed rule is unlikely to substantively affect small FDIC-supervised State savings associations. According to the most recent data, the FDIC supervised 33 small State savings associations.
The establishment of a new regulation, part 335, subpart A by the proposed rule would pose several broad effects on small FDIC-supervised institutions. As previously discussed, the proposed part 335, subpart A is consistent with both the requirements of part 390, subpart W and the 1996 Statement of Policy. Therefore, the primary effect of the proposed rule is to codify in regulation what was previously guidance for small FDIC-supervised institutions that are not State savings associations. Since the proposed rule largely harmonizes the FDIC's regulations with updated laws and regulations, the FDIC does not believe that the marginal effect of adopting part 335, subpart A will be significant for small FDIC-supervised institutions that are not small State savings associations. However, this aspect of the proposed rule is likely to benefit small FDIC-supervised institutions by establishing a consistent set of requirements that apply to all FDIC-supervised institutions. Further, this aspect of the proposed rule is likely to benefit small FDIC-supervised institutions by treating the securities offerings of small FDIC-supervised institutions more like those of other corporations and eliminating a duplicative system of regulations and forms. If the proposed rule were adopted, the establishment of a new regulation part 335, subpart A would pose some disclosure costs for entities directly affected by the proposed rule. However, because part 335, subpart A is consistent with the 1996 Statement of Policy, the concurrent rescission of 1996 Statement of Policy means there is no net change in disclosure for small FDIC-supervised institutions. Finally, this aspect of the proposed rule could pose regulatory costs for small FDIC-supervised institutions associated with potentially reviewing and revising existing internal processes and procedures for compliance with applicable securities offering disclosure regulations. However, because the number of directly affected small, FDIC-insured institutions is estimated to be relatively small, the FDIC believes at any such regulatory costs are also likely to be relatively small.
The technical amendments to §§ 303.163 and 333.4 are expected to clarify those regulations but not pose any substantive effect for small FDIC-supervised institutions.
Finally, the FDIC believes that the proposed rule, if adopted, will benefit small FDIC-supervised institutions and the public by clarifying regulations and improving the ease of reference.
Based on the information above, the FDIC certifies that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
Under section 2222 of the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA), the FDIC is required to review all of its regulations, at least once every 10 years, in order to identify any outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulations imposed on insured institutions.
Administrative practice and procedure, Bank deposit insurance, Banks, banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.
Banks, banking.
Accounting, Banks, banking, Confidential business information, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Aged, Civil rights, Conflict of interests, Credit, Crime, Equal employment opportunity, Fair housing, Government employees, Individuals with disabilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation proposes to amend 12 CFR parts 303, 333, 335, and 390 as follows:
12 U.S.C. 378, 478, 1463, 1467a, 1813, 1815, 1817, 1818, 1819 (Seventh and Tenth), 1820, 1823, 1828, 1831i, 1831e, 1831o, 1831p-1, 1831w, 1831z, 1835a, 1843(l), 3104, 3105, 3108, 3207, 5412; 15 U.S.C. 1601-1607.
(b)
(2) Conformity with the OCC requirements will not be sufficient for FDIC regulatory purposes if the FDIC determines that the proposed conversion transaction would pose a risk to the bank's safety or soundness, violate any law or regulation, or present a breach of fiduciary duty.
12 U.S.C. 1816; 1817(i); 1818; 1819(a) (Seventh, Eighth, and Tenth), 1828, 1828(m), 1831p-1(c), 5414 and 5415.
(e)
12 U.S.C. 1819.
Subpart A also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1816, 1818, 1828, 1831o, 1831p-1, 1462a, 1463, 1464, 5412.
Subpart B also issued under 15 U.S.C. 78j-1, 78l(i), 78m, 78n, 78p, 78w, 5412, 5414, 5415, 7241, 7242, 7243, 7244, 7261, 7262, 7264, and 7265.
(a)
(b)
(i) Organizational efforts pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1815 and subject to the requirements of 12 CFR part 303, subpart B;
(ii) A capital raise by an FDIC-supervised institution subject to an enforcement action pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1818 or a capital restoration plan pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1831o and 12 CFR part 324;
(iii) A mutual state-chartered bank conversion from mutual to stock form pursuant to 12 CFR 333.4 and part 303, subpart I; and
(iv) A mutual state savings association conversion from mutual to stock form pursuant to 12 CFR part 192.
(2) This subpart applies also to a security offering by a subsidiary of any State savings association described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(c)
(2)
(d)
Unless otherwise defined in this subpart, definitions shall have the meaning given to them in the Securities Act and the regulations of the SEC.
For the purposes of this subpart, the following definitions apply:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(1) 17 CFR 230.251 through 230.263 (SEC Regulation A);
(2) 17 CFR 230.500 through 230.508 (SEC Regulation D);
(3) 17 CFR 230.701 (SEC Rule 701);
(4) 17 CFR 230.144 (Rule 144) and 17 CFR 230.144A (Rule 144A);
(5) Offers and sales of securities in connection with a mutual-to-stock conversion pursuant to 12 CFR part 192; or
(6) Offers and sales in connection with the dissolution of the FDIC-supervised institution's holding company, provided all of the following requirements are met:
(i) The offer and sale of securities occurs solely as part of a dissolution in which the security holders exchange shares of securities in the FDIC-supervised institution's holding company (that had no significant assets other than securities of the FDIC supervised institution) for the FDIC-supervised institution's securities;
(ii) The FDIC-supervised institution's holding company's security holders receive, after the dissolution, substantially the same proportional share interests in the FDIC-supervised institution securities as they held in the holding company;
(iii) The rights and interests of the FDIC-supervised institution's holding company's security holders in the FDIC-supervised institution are substantially the same as those they had in the holding company prior to the transaction; and
(iv) The FDIC-supervised institution has substantially the same assets and liabilities as the FDIC-supervised institution's holding company had on a consolidated basis prior to the transaction.
(b)
(a)
(1) All sales must be conducted in a segregated area of the FDIC-supervised institution's offices, whenever possible;
(2) Offers and sales must be conducted by authorized personnel, excluding tellers, in places where deposits are not ordinarily received;
(3) The FDIC-supervised institution must obtain a signed and dated certification from the purchaser confirming that the purchaser has read and understands the disclosures set out in the offering document and the subscription order form;
(4) The certification must contain a separate place where a purchaser can indicate, by initialing or by comparable method, that the purchaser acknowledges that the securities being sold are not covered by FDIC deposit insurance; and
(b)
(a) A securities offering must include the following legends in a prominent place in capital letters printed in boldfaced type:
(b) A debt securities offering must include the following legend in a prominent place in capital letters printed in boldfaced type:
(a)
(i) For offerings described in § 335.1(b)(1)(i), together with the application for deposit insurance;
(ii) For offerings described in § 335.1(b)(1)(ii), together with the capital restoration plan or otherwise as required by an Order of the FDIC;
(iii) For offerings described in § 335.1(b)(1)(iii), together with the notice and materials required by 12 CFR 303.161; and
(iv) For offerings described in § 335.1(b)(1)(iv), together with the forms required by 12 CFR 192.5.
(2) Unless otherwise indicated in this subpart, filings should be submitted to the appropriate regional office. Instructions for submitting filings may be obtained from the appropriate FDIC regional director. The FDIC may require the applicant to submit additional information.
(3) The FDIC may request that an FDIC-supervised institution provide additional information in, or otherwise revise, a registration statement, prospectus, or other offering document, consistent with the requirements of the filings described in § 335.1(b). An FDIC-supervised institution may offer or sell securities in a transaction subject to this subpart when it receives a written statement from the FDIC to the effect that no additional information or changes are required.
(b)
12 U.S.C. 1819.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety zone for all navigable waters of Corpus Christi Bay and the Corpus Christi Ship Channel. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near the Corpus Christi Bayfront, during an airshow taking place from April 29, 2021 through May 2, 2021. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 5, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2021-0033 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email LCDR Margaret Brown, Waterways Management Division, Sector Corpus Christi, U.S. Coast Guard, email
On November 20, 2020, Schultz Airshows notified the Coast Guard that the Buccaneer Commission will host the Wings Over South Texas Airshow daily, 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. from April 29, 2021 through May 2, 2021. The Airshow's aerobatic box will take place over Corpus Christi Bay within a rectangular zone defined by the following coordinates; 27°49′2.78″ N, 097°23′16.1″ W; 27°47′3.69″ N, 097°23′14.62″ W; 27°49′2.73″ N, 097°22′42.97″ W; 27°47′5.46″ N, 097°22′41.02″ W; and back to 27°49′2.78″ N, 097°23′16.1″ W. The Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the Airshow would be a safety concern for anyone within the defined area.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters within the aerobatic box before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone daily from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. from April 29, 2021 through May 2, 2021. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within a rectangular zone defined by the following coordinates; 27°49′2.78″ N, 097°23′16.1″ W; 27°47′3.69″ N, 097°23′14.62″ W; 27°49′2.73″ N, 097°22′42.97″ W; 27°47′5.46″ N, 097°22′41.02″ W; and back to 27°49′2.78″ N, 097°23′16.1″ W. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. airshow. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic, including that which transits the portion of the Corpus Christi Ship Channel that is within the zone, would be permitted to move before and after the effective time of the zone. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notive to Mariners via FHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.
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 proposed rule would 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 proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
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 proposed 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
This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) because it would 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. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the
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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves safety zone lasting 5 hours daily for 4 days that would prohibit entry within the defined aerobatic box. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Memorandum for Record 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
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
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) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.
(d)
United States African Development Foundation.
Notice of meeting.
The US African Development Foundation (USADF) will hold its quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors to discuss the agency's programs and administration. This meeting will occur at the USADF office.
The meeting date is Tuesday, February 9, 2021, 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
The meeting will be held by teleconference. Please contact the Agency Contact listed below for conference details.
Nina-Belle Mbayu, (202) 233-8808,
Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA.
Notice.
This notice is to invite applications for grants under the Rural Business Development Grant (RBDG) Program for fiscal year (FY) 2021, subject to the availability of funding. This notice is being issued in order to allow applicants sufficient time to leverage financing, prepare and submit their applications, and give the Agency time to process applications within FY 2021. Successful applications will be selected by the Agency for funding and subsequently awarded to the extent that funding may ultimately be made available through appropriations. An announcement on the website at
All applicants are responsible for any expenses incurred in developing their applications.
Applications must be submitted to the USDA Rural Development State Office for the State where the Project is located. Complete applications may be submitted in paper or electronic format to the appropriate Rural Development State Office and must be received by 4:30 p.m. local time on March 31, 2021. A list of the USDA Rural Development State Offices can be found at:
Applications must be submitted to the USDA Rural Development State Office for the State where the Project is located. For Projects involving multiple states, the application must be filed in the Rural Development State Office where the Applicant is located. Applications may be submitted in paper or electronic format to the appropriate Rural Development State Office and must be received by 4:30 p.m. local time on the deadline date. Applicants are encouraged to contact their respective Rural Development State Office for an email contact to submit an electronic application prior to the submission deadline date. A list of the USDA Rural Development State Office contacts can be found at: https://www.rd.usda.gov/page/state-offices.
David Chestnut, Branch Chief, Program Management Division, at (202) 692-5233, or
The agency encourages applications that will help advance equity and improve outcomes in rural America. Applicants are encouraged to consider projects that provide measurable results in helping rural communities build robust and sustainable economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, partnerships and innovation. Please note that this Notice does not award points for these strategies.
The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, DIV III, Title B—Agriculture, Rural Development designated funding for Federally-Recognized Native American Tribes, Rural Empowerment Zone/Enterprise Communities/Rural Economic Area Partnerships, and projects in Persistent Poverty areas, Native American Persistent Poverty areas and for Strategic Economic and Community Development (SECD) projects in Fiscal Year 2020. Set aside funding may ultimately be made available through appropriations in FY2021 where continued emphasis is given to financial assistance for projects located in these areas. Eligible applicants for the set aside funds, if available, must demonstrate that at least 75 percent of the benefits of an approved grant will assist beneficiaries in the designated areas. The completed application deadline for these set aside funds, if available, is consistent with the application deadline date of March 31,
The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, SEC. 740 designates funding for projects in Persistent Poverty counties. Persistent Poverty counties as defined in SEC. 740 is “any county that has had 20 percent or more of its population living in poverty over the past 30 years, as measured by the 1990 and 2000 decennial censuses, and 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-year average, or any territory or possession of the United States”. Another provision in SEC. 740 expands the eligible population in Persistent Poverty counties to include any county seat of such a persistent poverty county that has a population that does not exceed the authorized population limit by more than 10 percent. This provision expands the current 50,000 population limit to 55,000 for only county seats located in Persistent Poverty counties. Therefore, beneficiaries of technical assistance services located in Persistent Poverty county seats with populations up to 55,000 (per the 2010 Census) are eligible.
1.
2.
Awards under the RBDG Programs will be made on a competitive basis using specific selection criteria contained in 7 CFR part 4280, subpart E. Information required to be in the application package includes Standard Form (SF) 424, “Application for Federal Assistance;” a copy of applicants organizational documents; a proposed scope of work; Resolution of the Board of Directors; SF LLL, “Restrictions on Lobbying;” RD 400-1, “Equal Opportunity Agreement;” RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement;” Assurance Statement for the Uniform Act; paperwork required in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970, “Environmental Policies and 7 CFR 4280.427 Application.
3.
4.
1.
Grants may be made to a Public Body/Government Entity; an Indian Tribe; or a Nonprofit entity primarily serving rural areas. In accordance with 7 CFR 4280.416(d), applicants that are not delinquent on any Federal debt or not otherwise disqualified from participation in these Programs are eligible to apply. The Agency will check the System for Award Management (SAM) to determine if the applicant has been debarred or suspended. Applicants must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to submitting an application and maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application under consideration by the Agency. All other restrictions in this notice will apply.
The Agency requires information to make an eligibility determination through applications that must include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) An original and one copy of SF 424, “Application For Federal Assistance (For Non-construction);”
(b) Copies of applicant's organizational documents showing the applicant's legal existence and authority to perform the activities under the grant;
(c) A proposed scope of work, including a description of the proposed Project. Grant funds may be used for projects identified in § 4280.417(a) as either a business opportunity type grant or a business enterprise type grant. The scope of work must include details of the proposed activities to be accomplished and timeframes for completion of each task, the number of months duration of the Project, and the estimated time it will take from grant approval to beginning of Project implementation. In accordance with 7 CFR 4280.421, a Project must reasonably be expected to be completed within 1 full year after it has begun.
(d) A written narrative that includes, at a minimum, the following items:
(1) An explanation of why the Project is needed, the benefits of the proposed Project, and how the Project meets the grant eligible purposes;
(2) Area to be served, identifying each governmental unit,
(3) Description of how the Project will coordinate Economic Development activities with other Economic Development activities within the Project area;
(4) Business to be assisted, if appropriate; and Economic Development to be accomplished;
(5) An explanation of how the proposed Project will result in newly
(6) A description of the applicant's demonstrated capability and experience in providing the proposed Project assistance or similar Economic Development activities, including experience of key staff members and persons who will be providing the proposed Project activities and managing the Project;
(7) The method and rationale used to select the areas and businesses that will receive the service;
(8) A brief description of how the work will be performed including whether organizational staff or consultants or contractors will be used;
(9) Please note that no assistance or funding can be provided to hemp producers or processors unless they have a valid license issued from an approved State, Tribal or Federal plan as per Section 10113 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, Public Law 115-334. Verification of valid hemp licenses will occur at the time of award; and
(10) Other information the Agency may request to assist in making a grant award determination;
(e) The latest 3 years of financial information to show the applicant's financial capacity to carry out the proposed work. If the applicant is less than 3 years old, at a minimum, the information should include all balance sheet(s), income statement(s) and cash flow statement(s). A current audited report is required if available;
(f) Intergovernmental review comments from the State Single Point of Contact, or evidence that the State has elected not to review the program under Executive Order 12372;
(g) Documentation regarding the availability and amount of other funds to be used in conjunction with the funds from the RBDG; Agency employees must make a determination that the other funds proposed are in place as part of their financial analysis toward the feasibility of the project. If there is not a firm commitment in writing of the other funding, it may not be considered for leveraging and scoring purposes and the project must be feasible without those funds;
(h) A budget which includes salaries, fringe benefits, consultant costs, indirect costs, and other appropriate direct costs for the Project; and
(i) RBDG construction Project grants must conform with 7 CFR part 1924, subpart A and the 7 CFR 1970 environmental requirements.
2.
The Agency will review each application for assistance in accordance with the priorities established in § 4280.435. The Agency will assign each application a priority rating and will select applications for funding based on the priority ratings and the total funds available to the program for opportunity-type projects and enterprise-type projects.
(a) The Agency will score each application based on the information contained in the application and its supporting information. All applications submitted for funding must contain sufficient information to permit the Agency to complete a thorough priority rating. Agency employees may not consider any information that is not provided by the applicant in writing for scoring purposes. Applications will not be considered for funding if they do not provide sufficient information to determine eligibility or are missing required elements. Total possible points for the scoring criteria is 240 plus discretionary points that may be awarded by the Administrator or State Director with justification and only for those projects submitting an initial grant application. Points will be awarded to an eligible application as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(b) Unfunded applications. The Agency will notify eligible applicants if funds are not available. If an applicant wishes to have their application maintained in an active file for future consideration, the applicant must revise and update their application in writing for the Agency to reconsider in a future funding cycle. Agency employees will notify unsuccessful applicants who did not receive funding due to insufficient funds in writing that their application will not be funded. The potential grantee will be permitted to respond in writing that they wish their application to be reconsidered in the next funding cycle. The applicant at that time may provide additional updated information to be considered in that funding cycle.
(c) Unfunded applications for set aside funding. The Agency will notify eligible applicants in writing if set aside funds are not available or they did not receive funding due to insufficient funds. Unfunded applications for set aside funds will be allowed to compete for available FY2021 regular RBDG funds in the State where the Project is located. For Projects involving multiple states, the application must be filed in the Rural Development State Office where the Applicant is located and will compete for funds in that State.
1.
For further information, entities wishing to apply for assistance should contact the USDA Rural Development State Office provided in the
Prior to official submission of grant applications, applicants may request technical assistance or other application guidance from the Agency, as long as such requests are made at least 15 days prior to the submission deadline. Technical assistance is not meant to be an analysis or assessment of the quality of the materials submitted, a substitute for agency review of completed applications, nor a determination of eligibility, if such determination requires in-depth analysis. The Agency will not solicit or consider scoring or eligibility information that is submitted after the application deadline. The Agency reserves the right to contact applicants to seek clarification information on materials contained in the submitted application.
Applications may be submitted in paper or electronic format to the appropriate Rural Development State Office and must be received by 4:30 p.m. local time on March 31, 2021. Applicants are encouraged to contact their respective Rural Development State Office for an email contact to submit an electronic application prior to the submission deadline date(s). All applicants must have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number which can be obtained at no cost via a toll-free request line at: (866) 705-5711 or at
2.
An application must contain all of the required elements and be submitted in one package. Each selection priority criterion outlined in 7 CFR 4280.427 must be addressed in the application. Failure to address any of the criterion will result in a zero-point score for that criterion and will impact the overall evaluation of the application. Copies of 7 CFR 4280, subpart E, will be provided to any interested applicant making a request to a Rural Development State Office. An original copy of the application must be filed with the Rural Development State Office for the State where the Project is located. For Projects involving multiple states, the application must be filed in the Rural Development State Office where the Applicant is located.
The applicant documentation and forms needed for a complete application are located in the PROGRAM DESCRIPTION section of this notice, and 7 CFR 4280, Subpart E. There are no specific formats required per this notice, and applicants may request forms and addresses from the
(a) There are no specific limitations on the number of pages or other formatting requirements other than those described in the PROGRAM DESCRIPTION section.
(b) There are no specific limitations on the number of pages, font size and type face, margins, paper size, number of copies, and the sequence or assembly requirements.
(c) The component pieces of this application should contain original signatures on the original application.
3.
(a) Application Deadline Dates: Applications must be submitted to the Rural Development State Office no later than 4:30 p.m. (local time) on March 31, 2021.
(b) The deadline date means that the completed application package must be received in the USDA Rural Development State Office by the established deadline date and time. All
(c) The Agency will determine the application receipt date for paper applications based on the actual date postmarked. The date of electronic application submissions will be the date received in the Rural Development State Office by the designated Agency staff person.
(d) If completed applications are not received by the March 31, 2021 deadline, the application will neither be reviewed nor considered for funding under any circumstances.
(e) Indirect costs will be permitted in accordance with applicable law and in accordance with 2 CFR part 200. Pre-Federal award costs will only be permitted with prior written approval by the Agency.
(f) Applicants may submit applications in hard copy or electronic format as previously indicated in the Application and Submission Information section of this notice. If the applicant wishes to hand deliver its application, the addresses for these deliveries can be located in the
(g) If you require alternative means of communication for program information (
1.
All eligible and complete applications will be evaluated and scored based on the selection criteria and weights contained in 7 CFR 4280, subpart E. Failure to address any one of the criteria by the application deadline will result in the application being determined ineligible, and the application will not be considered for funding.
2.
The Rural Development State Offices will review applications to determine if they are eligible for assistance based on requirements contained in 7 CFR parts 4280.416 and 4280.417. Funding of projects is subject to the Applicant's satisfactory submission of the items required by 7 CFR 4280 subpart E and this Notice in addition to any conditions specifically outlined in any issued USDA Rural Development Letter of Conditions if available funds are to be awarded.
Applications will compete at the state level in their respective category, business opportunity grants or business enterprise grants, for funding made available through Rural Development State allocated funds. Applications will be reviewed, prioritized by score, and funded by ranking each Project in highest to lowest score order until available funds are exhausted. If funds are exhausted at the state level, each State's highest scoring unfunded business enterprise project will have the opportunity to compete for funding through a final national competition.
The Agency reserves the right to award additional discretionary points under 7 CFR 4280.435. Discretionary points may be awarded to accomplish geographic distribution of funds, special Secretary of Agriculture initiatives such as Priority Communities, or a state's strategic goals. Discretionary points may only be awarded to initial grants.
1.
Successful applicants will receive notification for funding from the Rural Development State Office. Applicants must comply with all applicable statutes and regulations before the grant award can be approved and funded. If an application is withdrawn by the applicant, it can be resubmitted and will be evaluated as a new application in the period submitted.
2.
Additional requirements that apply to grantees selected for these Programs can be found in 7 CFR 4280, subpart E. Awards are subject to USDA grant regulations at 2 CFR Chapter IV which incorporated the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations 2 CFR 200.
All successful applicants will be notified by letter which will include a Letter of Conditions, and a Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions. This letter is not an authorization to begin performance. If the applicant wishes to consider beginning performance prior to the grant being officially closed, all pre-award costs must be approved in writing and in advance by the Agency. The grant will be considered officially awarded when all conditions in the Letter of Conditions have been met and the Agency obligates the funding for the Project.
Additional requirements that apply to grantees selected for these Programs can be found in 7 CFR 4280, subpart E; the Grants and Agreements regulations of the U.S. Department of Agriculture codified in 2 CFR 400.1 to 400.2 and 2 CFR part 415 to 422, and successor regulations to these parts.
In addition, all recipients of Federal financial assistance are required to report information about first-tier sub-awards and executive compensation (see 2 CFR part 170). The applicant will be required to have the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-282) reporting requirements (see 2 CFR 170.200(b), unless exempt under 2 CFR 170.110(b)).
The following additional requirements apply to grantees selected for these Programs:
(a) Form RD 4280-2 “Rural Business-Cooperative Service Financial Assistance Agreement.”
(b) Letter of Conditions.
(c) Form RD 1940-1, “Request for Obligation of Funds.”
(d) Form RD 1942-46, “Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions.”
(e) SF LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,” if applicable.
(f) Grantees will use Form SF 270, “Request for Advance or Reimbursement” when requesting grant funds from the Agency.
You no longer must complete the following forms for acceptance of a Federal award. This information is now collected through your registration or annual recertification in
• Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement.”
• Form AD-3031, “Assurance Regarding Felony Conviction or Tax Delinquent Status for Corporate Applicants.”
3.
(a) A Financial Status Report and a Project performance activity report will be required of all grantees on a quarterly basis until initial funds are expended and yearly thereafter, if applicable, based on the Federal fiscal year. Grantees must continuously monitor performance to ensure that time schedules are being met, projected work by time periods is being accomplished, and other performance objectives are being achieved. Grantees must submit an original of each report to the Agency no later than 30 days after the end of the quarter. The grantee will complete the Project within the total time available to it in accordance with the Scope of Work and any necessary modifications thereof prepared by the grantee and approved by the Agency. A final Project performance report will be required with the final Financial Status Report. The final report may serve as the last quarterly report. The final report must provide complete information regarding the jobs created and supported as a result of the RBDG grant if applicable. The Project performance reports must include, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) A comparison of actual accomplishments to the objectives established for that period;
(2) Problems, delays, or adverse conditions, if any, which have affected or will affect attainment of overall Project objectives, prevent meeting time schedules or objectives, or preclude the attainment of particular Project work elements during established time periods. This disclosure shall be accompanied by a statement of the action taken or planned to resolve the situation; and
(3) Objectives and timetable established for the next reporting period.
(4) Any special reporting requirements, such as jobs supported and created, businesses assisted, or economic development which results in improvements in median household incomes, and any other specific requirements, should be placed in the reporting section of the Letter of Conditions.
(5) Within 90 days after the conclusion of the Project, the Intermediary will provide a final Project evaluation report. The last quarterly payment will be withheld until the final report is received and approved by the Agency. Even though the grantee may request reimbursement on a monthly basis, the last 3 months of reimbursements will be withheld until a final report, Project performance, and financial status report are received and approved by the Agency.
(b) In addition to any reports required by 2 CFR part 200 and 2 CFR 400.1 to 400.2 and 2 CFR part 415 to 422, the grantee must provide reports as required by 7 CFR part 4280, subpart E.
For general questions about this announcement, please contact your USDA Rural Development State Office provided in the
All grants made under this notice are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as required by the USDA (7 CFR part 15, subpart A) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Title IX, Executive Order 13166 (Limited English Proficiency), Executive Order 11246, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collection requirement contained in this notice is approved by OMB under OMB Control Number 0570-0070.
All applicants, in accordance with 2 CFR part 25, must have a DUNS number, which can be obtained at no cost via a toll-free request line at (866) 705-5711 or online at
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA Programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at
(1)
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
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 New Jersey State Advisory Committee to the Commission will hold a virtual panel briefing on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. (ET) for the purpose of discussing the impact of criminal records on access to employment-occupational licenses in New Jersey.
February 10, 2021, Wednesday at 1:00 p.m. (ET):
Ivy Davis 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 emailed to the Eastern Regional Office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to:
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders and findings with December anniversary dates. In accordance with Commerce's regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews.
Applicable February 4, 2021.
Brenda E. Brown, AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4735.
Commerce has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for administrative reviews of various AD and CVD orders and findings with December anniversary dates.
All deadlines for the submission of various types of information, certifications, or comments or actions by Commerce discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting time.
If a producer or exporter named in this notice of initiation had no exports, sales, or entries during the period of review (POR), it must notify Commerce within 30 days of publication of this notice in the
In the event Commerce limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the POR. We intend to place the CBP data on the record within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 30 days of publication of the initiation
In the event Commerce decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act, the following guidelines regarding collapsing of companies for purposes of respondent selection will apply. In general, Commerce has found that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that has requested a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that Commerce may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. Determinations by Commerce to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.
Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended the Act by adding the concept of a particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of constructed value under section 773(e) of the Act.
Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of initial responses to section D of the questionnaire.
In proceedings involving non-market economy (NME) countries, Commerce begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is Commerce's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to an administrative review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.
To establish whether a firm is sufficiently independent from government control of its export activities to be entitled to a separate rate, Commerce analyzes each entity exporting the subject merchandise. In accordance with the separate rates criteria, Commerce assigns separate rates to companies in NME cases only if respondents can demonstrate the absence of both
All firms listed below that wish to qualify for separate rate status in the administrative reviews involving NME countries must complete, as appropriate, either a separate rate application or certification, as described below. For these administrative reviews, in order to demonstrate separate rate eligibility, Commerce requires entities for whom a review was requested, that were assigned a separate rate in the most recent segment of this proceeding in which they participated, to certify that they continue to meet the criteria for obtaining a separate rate. The Separate Rate Certification form will be available on Commerce's website at
Entities that currently do not have a separate rate from a completed segment of the proceeding
For exporters and producers who submit a Separate Rate Application or Certification and subsequently are selected as mandatory respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible for separate rate status unless they respond to all parts of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating administrative reviews of the following AD and CVD orders and findings. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews not later than December 31, 2021.
During any administrative review covering all or part of a period falling between the first and second or third and fourth anniversary of the publication of an AD order under 19 CFR 351.211 or a determination under 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or suspended investigation (after sunset review), Commerce, if requested by a domestic interested party within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the review, will determine whether AD duties have been absorbed by an exporter or producer subject to the review if the subject merchandise is sold in the United States through an importer that is affiliated with such exporter or producer. The request must include the name(s) of the exporter or producer for which the inquiry is requested.
For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant “gap” period of the order (
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with the procedures outlined in Commerce's regulations at 19 CFR 351.305. Those procedures apply to administrative reviews included in this notice of initiation. Parties wishing to participate in any of these administrative reviews should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (
Commerce's regulations identify five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). These regulations require any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The regulations, at 19 CFR 351.301, also provide specific time limits for such factual submissions based on the type of factual information being submitted. Please review the
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information using the formats provided at the end of the
Parties may request an extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 expires, or as otherwise specified by Commerce.
These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen fish fillets (fish fillets) from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels indicated in the “Final Results of Sunset Reviews” section of this notice.
Applicable February 4, 2021.
Matthew Renkey, 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) 482-2312.
On October 1, 2019, Commerce published the
The merchandise covered by the order is certain frozen fish fillets. For a full description of the scope,
All issues raised in this review, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping in the event of revocation and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the orders were revoked, are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at
Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, Commerce determines that revocation of the antidumping duty order on fish fillets from Vietnam would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and that the magnitude of the margins is up to 63.88 percent.
This notice serves as the only reminder to interested parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily finds that The Siam Industrial Wire Co., Ltd. (SIW) did not make sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR) January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results of review.
Applicable February 4, 2021.
Brian Smith or Samantha Kinney, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1766 or (202) 482-2285, respectively.
On April 1, 2019, based on a timely request for review filed by the petitioners,
The product covered by the
Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B)
For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions,
As a result of this review, Commerce preliminarily determines that a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent exists for SIW for the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018.
Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically via ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.
An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety via ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the established deadline.
Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless otherwise extended.
Upon publication of the final results of this administrative review, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.
If SIW's calculated weighted-average dumping margin is above
The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.
In accordance with our “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by SIW for which SIW did not know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary (
We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review.
The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for SIW will be the rate established in the final results of this administrative review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore,
This notice serves as a preliminary 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
We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is conducting the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pure magnesium from the People's Republic of China (China), covering the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. Commerce preliminarily determines that Tianjin Magnesium International, Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Magnesium Metal, Co., Ltd. (collectively TMI/TMM) did not have reviewable entries during the period of review (POR). We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.
Applicable February 4, 2021.
Kyle Clahane, 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) 482-5449.
On May 1, 2019, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pure magnesium from China for the POR.
The product covered by this antidumping duty order is pure magnesium from China, regardless of chemistry, form or size, unless expressly excluded from the scope of the order. Pure magnesium is a metal or alloy containing by weight primarily the element magnesium and produced by decomposing raw materials into magnesium metal. Pure primary magnesium is used primarily as a chemical in the aluminum alloying, desulfurization, and chemical reduction industries. In addition, pure magnesium is used as an input in producing magnesium alloy. Pure magnesium encompasses products (including, but not limited to, butt ends, stubs, crowns and crystals) with the following primary magnesium contents:
(1) Products that contain at least 99.95% primary magnesium, by weight (generally referred to as “ultra pure” magnesium) Magnesium Alloy”
(2) Products that contain less than 99.95%, but not less than 99.8%, primary magnesium, by weight (generally referred to as “pure” magnesium); and
(3) Products that contain 50% or greater, but less than 99.8% primary magnesium, by weight, and that do not conform to ASTM specifications for alloy magnesium (generally referred to as “off-specification pure” magnesium).
“Off-specification pure” magnesium is pure primary magnesium containing magnesium scrap, secondary magnesium, oxidized magnesium or impurities (whether or not intentionally added) that cause the primary magnesium content to fall below 99.8% by weight. It generally does not contain, individually or in combination, 1.5% or more, by weight, of the following alloying elements: Aluminum, manganese, zinc, silicon, thorium, zirconium and rare earths.
Excluded from the scope of the order are alloy primary magnesium (that meets specifications for alloy magnesium), primary magnesium anodes, granular primary magnesium (including turnings, chips and powder) having a maximum physical dimension (
Pure magnesium products covered by the order are currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 8104.11.00, 8104.19.00, 8104.20.00, 8104.30.00, 8104.90.00, 3824.90.11, 3824.90.19 and 9817.00.90. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.
We received timely submissions from TMI/TMM certifying that they did not have sales, shipments, or exports of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.
Based on the available record information, and consistent with our practice, we preliminarily determine that TMI/TMM had no shipments and, therefore, no reviewable entries during the POR. In addition, we find it is not appropriate to rescind the review with respect to these companies but, rather, to complete the review with respect to TMI/TMM and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review, consistent with our practice in non-market economy (NME) cases.
Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice in the
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Hearing requests should contain the following information: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues parties intend to discuss. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date of the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
Unless extended, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, including our analysis of all issues raised in any written brief, within 120 days of publication of this notice in the
Upon issuance of the final results, Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For TMI/TMM, which claimed no shipments, the cash deposit rate will remain unchanged from the rate assigned to TMI/TMM in the most recently completed review of the company; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters who are not under review in this segment of the proceeding but who have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the China-wide rate of 111.73 percent; and (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to Chinese exporter(s) that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
This notice also serves as a preliminary 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 period. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice is issued in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notification of standard prices and fee percentage.
NMFS publishes the standard ex-vessel prices and fee percentage for cost recovery under the Central Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program). This action is intended to provide participants in a rockfish cooperative with the standard prices and fee percentage for the 2020 fishing year, which was authorized from May 1 through November 15. The fee percentage is 3.0 percent. The fee payments are due from each rockfish cooperative on or before February 15, 2021.
Valid on: February 4, 2021.
Charmaine Weeks, 907-586-7231.
The rockfish fisheries are conducted in Federal waters near Kodiak, AK, by trawl and longline vessels. Regulations implementing the Rockfish Program are set forth at 50 CFR part 679. Exclusive harvesting privileges are allocated as quota share under the Rockfish Program for rockfish primary and secondary species. Each year, NMFS issues rockfish primary and secondary species cooperative quota (CQ) to rockfish quota shareholders to authorize harvest of these species. The rockfish primary species are northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and dusky rockfish. In 2012, dusky rockfish replaced the pelagic shelf rockfish species group in the GOA Groundfish Harvest Specifications (77 FR 15194, March 14, 2012). The rockfish secondary species include Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker rockfish, sablefish, and thornyhead rockfish. Rockfish cooperatives began fishing under the Rockfish Program on May 1, 2012.
The Rockfish Program is a limited access privilege program established under the provisions of section 303A of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Sections 303A and 304(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act require NMFS to collect fees to recover the actual costs directly related to the management, data collection and analysis, and enforcement of any limited access privilege program. Therefore, NMFS is required to collect fees for the Rockfish Program under sections 303A and 304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Section 304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act also limits the cost recovery fee so that it may not exceed 3 percent of the ex-vessel value of the fish harvested under the Rockfish Program.
NMFS calculates cost recovery fees based on standard ex-vessel value prices, rather than actual price data provided by each rockfish CQ holder. Use of standard ex-vessel prices is allowed under sections 303A and 304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. NMFS generates a standard ex-vessel price for each rockfish primary and secondary species on a monthly basis to determine the average price paid per pound for all shoreside processors receiving rockfish primary and secondary species CQ.
Regulations at 50 CFR 679.85(b)(2) require the Regional Administrator to publish rockfish standard ex-vessel values during the first quarter of each calendar year. The standard prices are described in U.S. dollars per pound for rockfish primary and secondary species CQ landings made during the previous year.
NMFS assesses a fee on the standard ex-vessel value of rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary species CQ harvested by rockfish cooperatives in the Central GOA and waters adjacent to the Central GOA when rockfish primary species caught by a cooperative are deducted from the Federal total allowable catch. The rockfish entry level longline fishery and trawl vessels that opt out of joining a cooperative are not subject to cost recovery fees because those participants do not receive rockfish CQ. Specific details on the Rockfish Program's cost recovery provision may be found in the implementing regulations set forth at § 679.85.
NMFS informs—by letter—each rockfish cooperative of the fee percentage applied to the previous year's landings and the total amount due. Fees are due on or before February 15 of each year. Failure to pay on time will result in the permit holder's rockfish quota share becoming non-transferable, and the person will be ineligible to receive any additional rockfish quota share by transfer. In addition, cooperative members will not receive any rockfish CQ the following year until full payment of the fee is received by NMFS.
NMFS calculates and publishes in the
Using the fee percentage formula described above, the estimated percentage of program costs to value for the 2020 calendar year is 3.66 percent of the standard ex-vessel value; however, the fee percentage amount must not exceed 3 percent pursuant to section 304(d)(2)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Therefore, the 2020 fee percentage is adjusted to 3.00 percent. The fee percentage for 2020 is equivalent to the 2019 fee percentage of 3.00 percent (85 FR 3647, January 22, 2020). Program costs for 2020 decreased in comparison to 2019 costs, however, the value of the fishery decreased by 26.2 percent resulting in a higher fee percentage prior to adjustments. The majority of the 2020 costs were a result of direct personnel and contract costs.
16 U.S.C. 773
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notification of approved monitoring service providers.
NMFS has approved six companies to provide Northeast multispecies sector at-sea and/or electronic monitoring services in fishing years 2021 and 2022. Regulations implementing the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan require at-sea and electronic monitoring companies to apply to, and be approved by, NMFS in order to be eligible to provide monitoring services to sectors. This action will allow sectors to contract for at-sea and electronic monitoring services with any of the approved service providers for fishing years 2021 and 2022.
The list of NMFS-approved sector monitoring service providers is available at:
Claire Fitz-Gerald, Fishery Policy Analyst, (978) 281-9255, email
The Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan includes a requirement for industry-funded monitoring of catch by sector vessels. Sectors must contract with independent third-party service providers to provide at-sea and/or electronic monitoring services to their vessels. In order to provide at-sea or electronic monitoring services to sectors, monitoring companies must apply to, and be approved by, NMFS. Once approved, service providers must meet specified performance requirements outlined in 50 CFR 648.87(b)(4), including required coverage levels, in order to maintain eligibility.
Applications approved this year will cover both fishing year 2021 and fishing year 2022 (May 1, 2021 through April 30, 2023). There will be an opportunity in the fall of 2021 for additional monitoring companies to apply for approval to provide at-sea and electronic monitoring services in fishing year 2022.
The regulations at § 648.87(b)(4) describe the criteria for approval of at-sea and electronic monitoring service providers. We approve service providers based on: (1) Completeness and sufficiency of applications; and (2) determination of the applicant's ability to meet the performance requirements of a sector monitoring service provider. We must notify service providers, in writing, if NMFS withdraws approval for any reason.
NMFS approved six companies to provide monitoring services to the Northeast multispecies sectors in fishing years 2021 and 2022. Four of the six companies are approved to provide both at-sea and electronic monitoring services: A.I.S., Inc.; East West Technical Services, LLC; Fathom Research, LLC; and Saltwater, Inc. NMFS approved the other two companies to provide electronic monitoring services: Flywire Cameras and Teem Fish.
We approved these six companies to provide at-sea and/or electronic monitoring services in fishing years 2021 and 2022 because they have met the application requirements and documented their ability to comply with service provider standards. In addition, A.I.S., Inc., East West Technical Services, LLC, and Fathom Research, LLC are currently approved to provide at-sea monitoring services to sectors in fishing years 2019 and 2020 and have a history of meeting or exceeding the requirements of the at-sea monitoring program in the region. We will closely monitor the performance of approved providers, and we will withdraw approval during the current approval term, or disapprove a provider in future fishing years, if we determine performance standards are not being met.
We received applications from two additional companies, but need further information before their application is sufficiently complete for us to make an approval determination. Typically, we engage in an iterative process with provider companies to assist them in assembling and submitting a complete application for our consideration. Because this is our first time approving electronic monitoring companies to provider monitoring services, we are continuing to work with these companies to help them through this process. In the meantime, we are continuing with the approval process for the providers that have submitted complete applications and demonstrated their ability to meet program requirements. Moving forward with notification of our approval of the completed applications while continuing to work with the two remaining applicants is necessary to allow sectors sufficient time to negotiate monitoring contracts for the upcoming fishing year. If we subsequently decide to approve these companies, we will publish an additional notice in the
16 U.S.C. 1801
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce.
Notice.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has extended the Expanded Collaborative Search Pilot (CSP) program, originally running from November 2017 through October 2020, an additional two years. The Expanded CSP program, conducted with the Japan Patent Office (JPO) and the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), builds on the success of the initial CSP program, taking advantage of improvements in patent quality and examination pendency. With the Expanded CSP, applicants may request that multiple partnering intellectual property (IP) offices exchange search results for their counterpart applications prior to formulating and issuing their office actions. Each designated partner IP office independently conducts a prior art search for its corresponding counterpart application. The search results are then exchanged between the designated partner IP office(s), including the USPTO, before any IP office issues an office action. With this exchange of search results, the examiners in all designated partner IP offices will have a more comprehensive set of prior art references to consider when making initial patentability determinations. The Expanded CSP allows the USPTO to study the impact on examination processes of exchanges of search results between the USPTO and multiple partner IP offices prior to formulating and issuing office actions.
Under the Expanded CSP, the USPTO and partner IP offices will each continue to accept requests to participate beyond November 1, 2020, until October 31, 2022. Each IP office will not grant more than 400 requests per year per partner office. The offices may extend the pilot program (with or without modification) if they deem it appropriate. Each office reserves the right to withdraw from the program at any time.
Inquiries regarding the handling of any specific application participating in the pilot may be directed to Nelson Yang, Senior Advisor, International Patent Business Solutions, Office of International Patent Cooperation, by phone at 571-272-0826. Any inquiries regarding this pilot program can be emailed to
The USPTO is continually looking for ways to improve the quality of issued patents and to promote worksharing with other IP offices throughout the world. Worksharing benefits applicants by promoting compact prosecution, reducing pendency, and supporting patent quality by reducing the likelihood of inconsistencies in patentability determinations (not predicated upon differences in national patent laws) between IP offices. The USPTO has launched numerous worksharing pilot programs, including both the Initial and Expanded versions of CSP with the JPO and the KIPO. In the Initial CSP, the participating offices implemented administrative procedures to facilitate worksharing between the USPTO and a single designated partner IP office in the form of sharing search results of related counterpart applications. Feedback from the completed Initial CSP and the current Expanded CSP showed sufficiently positive benefits to justify extending the CSP an additional two years to continue to permit worksharing between the USPTO and more than one designated partner IP office for the corresponding U.S. application.
The USPTO will continue to cooperate in the Expanded CSP to determine whether exchanging the results from searches independently performed by multiple IP offices, which occur substantially simultaneously, also increases the efficiency and quality of patent examination. The Expanded CSP is designed so that this exchange of search results would occur prior to the IP offices making initial patentability determinations. The current partner IP offices for the Expanded CSP remain the JPO and the KIPO. The USPTO will announce future partner IP offices when they are designated.
Currently, applicants in the USPTO having U.S. applications with claims of foreign priority may have search results and prior art cited to them by the foreign IP office during pendency of their U.S. applications. Often, applicants submit the prior art after examination on the merits is already underway in their U.S. application. Upon evaluation of the search results
In order to study the benefits of the exchange of search results between multiple IP offices, current USPTO examination practice is modified for applications in the Expanded CSP so that a search will be conducted and search results generated without issuance of an Office action. The U.S. applications in the Expanded CSP are “made special” pursuant to USPTO procedures to ensure that they are contemporaneously searched with their corresponding counterpart applications.
In the original version of the CSP, the USPTO required the use of the First Action Interview Pilot Program (FAI), which separated the prior art search from the issuance of an Office action. The USPTO determined that it is unnecessary to require applicants participating in the Expanded CSP to use FAI procedures. Instead, applications in the Expanded CSP are accorded special status before the first action on the merits (FAOM), and prior art references provided through the exchange of search results will be included in the FAOM.
In the United States, the Expanded CSP requires a petition to make special for the participating application and authorization to exchange information with the designated partner IP office(s) prior to an initial determination of patentability. As this worksharing program is operating under a common framework across all agreements between the USPTO and the partner offices, it is permissible to participate in the Expanded CSP with multiple partner offices simultaneously, and the program is open to adding more partner IP offices once appropriate agreements are in place.
An application must meet all the requirements set forth in section III of this notice to be accepted into the Expanded CSP. Applicants must file a Petition to Make Special Under the Expanded Collaborative Search Pilot Program using Form PTO/SB/437 via EFS-web or Patent Center in a U.S. application. Use of the form is mandatory and will assist applicants in complying with the pilot program's requirements, as well as aid the USPTO in quickly identifying participating applications. Form PTO/SB/437 is available at
In addition to a petition being filed with the USPTO, a request must also be filed in the corresponding counterpart applications in each applicant-designated partner IP office, in accordance with the requirements of that office. (Partner IP offices may require a petition or a request; therefore, for purposes of this notice, usage of the term “request” refers to the initial submission that a partner IP office requires to initiate participation in the Expanded CSP.) As each partner IP office's conditions for entry may differ, applicants should review the requirements of the relevant partner IP offices to ensure compliance.
No fee for a petition to make special under 37 CFR 1.102 is required for participation in the Expanded CSP.
New patent applications are normally taken up for examination in the order of their U.S. filing date. Applications accepted into the Expanded CSP receive expedited processing by being granted special status and taken out of turn until issuance of an FAOM, but they will not maintain special status thereafter. Designated partner IP offices and the USPTO share search results before the issuance of an initial determination on patentability. Participants in the Expanded CSP should review the references cited in each respective office's initial determination on patentability. The references cited in the initial search by any partner IP office will become of record in the USPTO application and will be listed on Form PTO-892, and the examiner will consider the references, thereby reducing the burden on the applicant to file an Information Disclosure Statement (IDS). If the references cited by any partner IP office are not already of record in the USPTO application and the applicant wants to ensure that the examiner considers the references, then the applicant should file an IDS that includes a copy of the initial determination on patentability, along with copies of any missing or newly cited references in accordance with 37 CFR 1.97, 37 CFR 1.98, and the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) sec. 609.04(a)-(b). See also MPEP secs. 609 and 2001.06(a).
Each office may reevaluate the workload and resources needed to administer the Expanded CSP at any time. The USPTO will provide notice of any substantive changes to the program (including early termination of the program) at least 30 days prior to the implementation of any changes.
The following requirements must be satisfied for a petition under the Expanded CSP to be granted:
(1) The application must be a non-reissue, non-provisional utility application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), or an international application that has entered the national stage in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, where the effective filing date of any claimed invention is no earlier than March 16, 2013. For corresponding counterpart applications filed in accordance with the agreement between the USPTO and the KIPO only, plant applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 161 are also eligible. The U.S. application and all corresponding counterpart applications must have a common earliest priority date that is no earlier than March 16, 2013. The disclosures of the U.S. application and all counterpart applications must support the claimed subject matter as of a common date. The U.S. application must be complete and eligible to receive a filing receipt at the time the petition is filed.
(2) A completed petition, Form PTO/SB/437, must be filed in the application via EFS-Web or Patent Center. Form PTO/SB/437 is available at
(A) An express written consent under 35 U.S.C. 122(c) for the USPTO to accept and consider prior art references and comments from each designated partner IP office during the examination of the U.S. application;
(B) Written authorization for the USPTO to provide to the designated partner IP office access to the participating U.S. application's bibliographic data and search results in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 122(a) and 37 CFR 1.14(c); and
(C) A statement that the applicant agrees not to file a request for a refund of the search fee and any excess claim fee paid in the application after the mailing of the decision on the petition to join the Expanded CSP. (Note: Any petition for express abandonment under 37 CFR 1.138(d) to obtain a refund of the search fee and excess claim fee filed after the mailing of a decision on the petition will be granted, but the fees will not be refunded.)
(3) Petitions must be filed before examination has commenced. Examination may commence at any time after an application has been assigned to an examiner. Petitions should preferably be filed before the application has been assigned to an examiner to ensure that the USPTO does not examine the application before recognizing the petition. Therefore, applicants should check the status of the application using the Patent Application Information and Retrieval (PAIR) system or Patents Center to see if the application has been assigned to an examiner. If the application has been assigned to an examiner, the applicant should contact the examiner to confirm that the application has not been taken up for examination and inform the examiner that a petition to participate in the Expanded CSP is being filed. Following this guidance will minimize delays caused by remedial corrective action when a petition is not recognized before examination commences. Further, examination must not have commenced in the identified corresponding counterpart application(s) before each designated partner IP office when filing petitions requesting participation in the U.S. application.
(4) The petition filed in the USPTO and any request filed in a designated partner IP office must be filed within 15 days of each other. If the petition and request(s) are not filed within 15 days of each other, the applicant runs the risk of one of the pending applications being acted upon by an examiner before entry into the pilot program, which will result in the applications being denied entry into the Expanded CSP. The request for participation filed in the corresponding counterpart application(s) for the Expanded CSP must be granted by at least one of the designated partner IP offices in order to participate in the Expanded CSP.
(5) The petition submission must include a claims correspondence table, which, at a minimum, must establish “substantial corresponding scope” between all independent claims present in the U.S. application and the corresponding counterpart application(s) filed in the designated partner IP office(s). The claims correspondence table must individually list the claims of the instant U.S. application and correlate them to the claims of the corresponding counterpart application having a substantially corresponding scope. Claims are considered to have a “substantially corresponding scope” when, after accounting for differences due to claim format requirements, the scope of the corresponding claims in the corresponding counterpart application(s) would either anticipate or render obvious the subject matter recited under U.S. law. Additionally, claims in the U.S. application that introduce a new/different category of claims than those presented in the corresponding counterpart application(s) are not considered to substantially correspond. For example, where the corresponding counterpart application(s) contain only claims relating to a process of manufacturing a product, any product claims in the U.S. application are not considered to substantially correspond, even if the product claims are dependent on process claims that do substantially correspond to claims in the corresponding counterpart application(s). Applicants may file a preliminary amendment, in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121, to amend the claims of the U.S. application to satisfy this requirement when attempting to make the U.S. application eligible for the program. A translated copy of the claims in English for each counterpart application is required if the application in the designated partner IP office(s) is not publicly available in English. A machine translation is sufficient. Non-corresponding claims need not be listed.
(6) The U.S. application must contain 3 or fewer independent claims and 20 or fewer total claims. The U.S. application must not contain any multiple dependent claims; the corresponding counterpart application may contain multiple dependent claims, in accordance with the national practice of the partner IP office where it is filed. For a U.S. application that contains more than 3 independent claims or 20 total claims, or any multiple dependent claims, applicants may file a preliminary amendment, in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121, to cancel the excess claims and/or the multiple dependent claims to make the application eligible for the Expanded CSP.
As discussed in section III, the number of petitions to make special filed in the U.S. application must equal the number of designated partner IP offices where a corresponding counterpart application has been filed. At least one designated partner office must grant the request in order for that application and the counterpart U.S. application to participate in the Expanded CSP.
If examination commences in either the U.S. application or a given designated corresponding counterpart application before either the petition or request is filed, then that combination of U.S. application and designated corresponding counterpart application cannot participate in the Expanded CSP. Applicants are advised that, even if they timely file a request with a designated partner office, if the USPTO is not informed by the designated partner office of the filing of the request in the corresponding counterpart application within 20 days of a petition filing with the USPTO, then the USPTO may initially dismiss the petition. In such a situation, the applicant may request reconsideration, as discussed in item B, below.
The claims must be directed to a single invention. If the examiner determines that not all the claims presented are directed to a single invention, the telephone restriction practice set forth in MPEP sec. 812.01 will be followed. The applicant must make an election without traverse during the telephonic interview. If the applicant refuses to make an election without traverse, or if the examiner cannot reach the applicant after a reasonable effort (
During examination, the USPTO examiner will consider all exchanged search results and all references submitted by the applicant in accordance with 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Search results that are not received by the USPTO within four months from the date the petition was granted may not be included in the FAOM. The examiner will prepare and issue an Office action and notify the applicant if any designated partner IP office did not provide search results prior to the issuance of the Office action. Once an FAOM issues, the application will no longer be treated as special under the Expanded CSP.
Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).
Notice; correction; extension of comment period.
CIGIE published a notice in the
The system of records, CIGIE-5, appearing in the
Virginia Grebasch, Senior Counsel, Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, (202) 292-2600 or
In the
Submit comments identified by “CIGIE-5” by any of the following methods:
1.
2.
Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
Notice.
The Department of Education is issuing a notice inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2021 for the Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad (DDRA) Program, Assistance Listing Number 84.022A. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1840-0005.
The addresses pertinent to this competition—including the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application—can be found under
Dr. Pamela J. Maimer, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 258-24, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-6891. Email:
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
This priority is:
A research project that focuses on one or more of the following geographic areas: Africa, East Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands, South Asia, the Near East, Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia, and the Western Hemisphere (excluding the United States and its territories).
A research project that focuses on any modern foreign language except French, German, or Spanish.
A research project conducted in the field of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, computer science, education (comparative or international), international development, political science, public health, or economics.
Applicants that address Competitive Preference Priority 2 must intend to engage in dissertation research abroad in modern foreign languages and area studies with a thematic focus on any one of the academic fields referenced above.
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and the Federal civil rights laws.
The open licensing requirement in 2 CFR 3474.20 does not apply to this program.
The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
You can contact ED Pubs at its website, also:
2.
Submit applications for grants under the program electronically using
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under
3.
4.
5.
• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
• Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger, or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet, budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurance and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the biography, or letters of support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.
6.
To do business with the Department, you must—
a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following website:
If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.
The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.
Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can submit an application through G5.
If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.
Information about SAM is available at
7.
a.
Submit applications for grants under the Fulbright-Hays DDRA Fellowship Program, Assistance Listing Number 84.022A, electronically using the G5 system, accessible through the Department's G5 site at:
Please note the following:
• The process for submitting applications electronically under the Fulbright-Hays DDRA Fellowship Program requires several steps. The following is a brief overview of the process; however, all applicants should review the detailed description of the application process in the application package. In summary, the major steps are:
(1) IHEs must email the name of the institution and the full name and email address of the project director to
(2) Students must complete their individual applications and submit them to their home IHE project director using G5;
(3) Persons providing references for individual students must complete and submit reference forms for the students and submit them to the IHE's project director using G5; and
(4) The IHE's project director must officially submit the IHE's application, including all eligible individual student applications, reference forms, and other required forms, using G5.
• The IHE must complete the electronic submission of the grant application by 4:30:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on the application deadline date. G5 will not accept an application for
• Student applicants will not receive additional point value because the student submits his or her application in electronic format, nor will we penalize the IHE or student applicant if the applicant qualifies for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submits an application in paper format.
•
• Both IHEs and student applicants must upload the narrative sections and all other attachments to their application as files in a read-only flattened Portable Document Format (PDF), meaning any fillable documents must be saved and submitted as non-fillable PDF files. Do not upload any interactive or fillable PDF files. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, non-modifiable PDF (
• Submit student transcripts electronically through the G5 system.
• Prior to submitting your electronic application, you may wish to print a copy of it for your records.
• After the individual student electronically submits his or her application to the IHE, the student will receive an automatic acknowledgment from the G5 system. After a person submits a reference electronically, he or she will receive an online confirmation from the G5 system. After the applicant IHE submits its application, including all eligible individual student applications, to the Department, the applicant IHE will receive an automatic acknowledgment from G5 that will include a unique PR/Award number for the IHE's application.
• Within three working days after submitting its electronic application the applicant IHE must—
(1) Print the SF 424 from G5;
(2) Have the Authorizing Representative sign this form;
(3) Place the PR/Award number in the upper right-hand corner of the hard-copy signature page of the SF 424; and
(4) Fax the signed SF 424 to the Application Control Center at (202) 245-6272.
• We may request that you provide us hard copies with original signatures for other forms in the application at a later date.
(1) The IHE is a registered user of the G5 system and the IHE has initiated an electronic application for this competition; and
(2) (a) G5 is unavailable for 60 minutes or more between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Eastern Time, on the application deadline date; or
(b) G5 is unavailable for any period of time between 3:30 p.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on the application deadline date.
We must acknowledge and confirm these periods of unavailability before granting the IHE an extension. To request this extension or to confirm our acknowledgment of any system unavailability, an IHE may contact either (1) the person listed under
b.
We discourage paper applications, but if electronic submission is not possible (
If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. Please send this statement to the person listed under
If you submit a paper application, you must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
The IHE must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.
If the IHE mails its application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, the IHE should check with its local post office.
We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.
c.
(1) The IHE must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the Assistance Listing Number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which the IHE is submitting its application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail a notification of receipt of the IHE's grant application. If the IHE does not receive this grant notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, the IHE should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
1.
(a)
(1) The statement of the major hypotheses to be tested or questions to be examined, and the description and justification of the research methods to be used;
(2) The relationship of the research to the literature on the topic and to major theoretical issues in the field, and the project's originality and importance in terms of the concerns of the discipline;
(3) The preliminary research already completed in the United States and overseas or plans for such research prior to going overseas, and the kinds, quality and availability of data for the research in the host country or countries;
(4) The justification for overseas field research and preparations to establish appropriate and sufficient research contacts and affiliations abroad;
(5) The applicant's plans to share the results of the research in progress and a copy of the dissertation with scholars and officials of the host country or countries; and
(6) The guidance and supervision of the dissertation advisor or committee at all stages of the project, including guidance in developing the project, understanding research conditions abroad, and acquainting the applicant with research in the field.
(b)
(1) The overall strength of the applicant's graduate academic record;
(2) The extent to which the applicant's academic record demonstrates strength in area studies relevant to the proposed project;
(3) The applicant's proficiency in one or more of the languages (other than English and the applicant's native language) of the country or countries of research, and the specific measures to be taken to overcome any anticipated language barriers; and
(4) The applicant's ability to conduct research in a foreign cultural context, as evidenced by the applicant's references or previous overseas experience, or both.
2.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
For FY 2021, student applications will be divided into seven categories based on the world area focus of their research projects, as described in the absolute priority. Language and area studies experts in discrete world area-based panels will review the student applications. Each panel will review, score, and rank its applications separately from the applications assigned to the other world area panels. However, all fellowship applications will be ranked together from the highest to lowest score for funding purposes.
3.
4.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
5.
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering results based on the program objectives through an objective process of evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR 200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to maximize
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
1.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.
2.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the
3.
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to
4.
The Department will use the following measures to evaluate its success in meeting this objective:
The information provided by grantees in their performance report submitted via IRIS will be the source of data for these measures. Reporting screens for institutions and fellows may be viewed at:
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.
Notice.
Under the Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program, Assistance Listing Number 84.358A, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) awards grants on a formula basis to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) to address the unique needs of rural school districts. In this notice, we establish the deadline and describe the submission procedures for fiscal year (FY) 2021 SRSA grant applications. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1810-0646.
All LEAs eligible for FY 2021 SRSA funds must submit an application electronically via the process described in this notice by the deadline in this notice.
Mr. Robert Hitchcock, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E-218, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 401-0039. Email:
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf or a text telephone, call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Depending on the number of eligible LEAs identified in a given year and the amount appropriated by Congress for the program, some eligible LEAs may receive an SRSA allocation of $0 under the statutory funding formula.
The FY 2021 SRSA grant awards will be made under title V, part B, subpart 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA).
For FY 2021, an LEA (including a public charter school that meets the definition of LEA in section 8101(30) of the ESEA) is eligible for an award under the SRSA program if it meets both the criteria below:
(a) The total number of students in average daily attendance at all of the schools served by the LEA is fewer than 600; or each county in which a school served by the LEA is located has a total population density of fewer than 10 persons per square mile; and
(b) All of the schools served by the LEA are designated with a school locale code of 41, 42, or 43 by the Department's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) or the Secretary has determined, based on a demonstration by the LEA and concurrence of the State educational agency, that the LEA is located in an area defined as rural by a governmental agency of the State.
The Department provides an eligibility spreadsheet containing each LEA eligible for FY 2021 SRSA grant funds, which is available on the Department's website at:
If an LEA on the Department's list of LEAs eligible to receive an FY 2021 SRSA award will close prior to the 2021-2022 school year, that LEA is no longer eligible to receive an FY 2021 SRSA award and should not apply.
The “Choice of Participation” provision under section 5225 of the ESEA gives an LEA eligible for both SRSA and the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under title V, part B, subpart 2 of the ESEA the option to participate in either the SRSA program or the RLIS program. An LEA eligible for both SRSA and RLIS is henceforth referred to as a “dual-eligible LEA.”
Under 34 CFR 75.104(a), the Secretary makes a grant only to an eligible entity that submits an application.
In FY 2021, each LEA eligible to receive an SRSA award is required to submit an SRSA application in order to receive SRSA funds, regardless of whether the LEA received an award or submitted an application in any previous year. This includes each dual-eligible LEA that chooses to participate in the SRSA program instead of the RLIS program, and each SRSA-eligible LEA that is a member of an educational service agency (ESA) that does not receive SRSA funds on the LEA's behalf. In the case of an SRSA-eligible LEA that is a member of an SRSA-eligible ESA, the LEA and ESA must coordinate directly with each other to determine which entity will submit an SRSA application on the LEA's behalf, as both entities may not apply for or receive SRSA funds for the LEA. Additionally, pursuant to section 5225 of the ESEA, a dual-eligible LEA that applies for SRSA funds in accordance with these application submission procedures will not be considered for an RLIS award.
As a reminder, each applicant must apply with its own unique Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. We also note that a separate application must be submitted for each eligible LEA. For example, if a rural community has two distinct LEAs—one composed of its elementary school(s) and one composed of its high school(s)—each distinct LEA would have to submit its own SRSA application with the LEA's own unique DUNS number.
An LEA eligible to receive FY 2021 SRSA funds that fails to submit an FY 2021 SRSA application in accordance with the application and submission information below is at risk of not receiving an FY 2021 SRSA award. Such an LEA may receive an award only to the extent funds become available after awards are made to all eligible LEAs that complied with the application procedures.
The Department will send each LEA eligible for FY 2021 SRSA grant funds an email with a uniquely identifiable application link on February 10, 2021. The email will include customized instructions for completing the electronic application via the
An eligible LEA must submit an electronic application via
Please note the following:
• We estimate that it will take 30 minutes to submit an application. However, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the application process.
• To better ensure applications are processed in a more timely, accurate, and efficient manner, if an LEA has not submitted an application by March 1, 2021, we will send the LEA a reminder email to submit its application.
• An application received by
• Once an application is submitted via
If you are unable to submit an application by April 16, 2021 because of problems with
To do business with the Department, you must register in the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database, using the following information:
a. DUNS number.
b. Legal business name.
c. Physical address from your Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) record.
d. Taxpayer identification number (TIN).
e. Taxpayer name associated with your TIN.
f. Bank information to set up Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) (
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at:
Information about SAM is available at:
The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to register with SAM.
If you are currently registered with SAM, you may need to update your DUNS registration. Please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your DUNS registration if it has expired or will expire prior to when you expect to receive a SRSA award. A DUNS number will expire every 12 months after it has been updated.
You can check your DUNS registration status by using the SAM Status Tracker at:
If you are a corporate entity, agency (including an LEA), institution, or organization, you can find your taxpayer name and TIN in tax documents from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (such as a 1099 or W-2 form) or obtain one from the IRS.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
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 using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice 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 particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready for environmental analysis.
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued a final rule on July 15, 2020, revising the regulations under 40 CFR parts 1500-1518 that federal agencies use to implement NEPA (see Update to the Regulations Implementing
l. The Mongaup Falls Project includes the Mongaup Falls Development and the Black Brook Development. The Black Brook Development has been permanently out of service since 1984, when portions of the penstock, stoplogs, and flashboards were removed.
The
The
m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's website at
Register online at
n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “PROTEST”, “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRELIMINARY FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS;” (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
o.
p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
q. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis provided for in § 5.22: (1) A copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification. Please note that the certification request must be sent to the certifying authority and to the Commission concurrently.
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 using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice 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 particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready for environmental analysis.
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued a final rule on July 15, 2020, revising the regulations under 40 CFR parts 1500-1518 that federal agencies use to implement NEPA (see Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 85 FR 43304). The Final Rule became effective on and applies to any NEPA process begun after September 14, 2020. An agency may also apply the regulations to ongoing activities and environmental documents begun before September 14, 2020, which includes the proposed Rio Project. Commission staff intends to conduct its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
l.
m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's website at
Register online at
n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's
All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “PROTEST”, “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRELIMINARY FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS”; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
o.
p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
q. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis provided for in § 5.22: (1) A copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification. Please note that the certification request must be sent to the certifying authority and to the Commission concurrently.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a subsequent license for the Chittenden Falls Hydroelectric Project No. 3273 (Chittenden Falls Project), located on Kinderhook Creek near the Town of Stockport, Columbia County, New York, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project.
The EA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Chittenden Falls Project and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
The Commission provides all interested persons with an opportunity to view and/or print the EA via the internet through the Commission's Home Page (
You may also register online at
Any comments should be filed within 45 days from the date of this notice.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments using the Commission's eFiling system at
For further information, contact Monir Chowdhury at (202) 502-6736, or 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 using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice 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 particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready for environmental analysis.
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued a final rule on July 15, 2020, revising the regulations under 40 CFR parts 1500-1518 that federal agencies use to implement NEPA (see Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 85 FR 43304). The Final Rule became effective on and applies to any NEPA process begun after September 14, 2020. An agency may also apply the regulations to ongoing activities and environmental documents begun before September 14, 2020, which includes the proposed Swinging Bridge Project. Commission staff intends to conduct its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
l. The Swinging Bridge Project includes the Toronto Development, the Cliff Lake Development, and the Swinging Bridge Development. Water stored in Toronto Reservoir is released into Cliff Lake Reservoir, which is connected to Swinging Bridge Reservoir via a tunnel.
The
The
The
m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's website at
Register online at
n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “PROTEST”, “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRELIMINARY FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS;” (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
o.
p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
q. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis provided for in § 5.22: (1) a copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification. Please note that the certification request must be sent to the certifying authority and to the Commission concurrently.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric proceeding has been initiated by the Commission:
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
k.
l.
Since 2014, Commission staff have worked with Goose River Hydro, Inc., licensee, to restore project operation. On February 2, 2018, the licensee filed an application for subsequent license, but failed to provide specific details on needed repairs. On July 16, 2019, Commission staff informed the licensee of the need for additional information. A response was filed on October 31, 2019, which by letter dated January 8, 2020, Commission staff found inadequate. On April 10, 2020, Commission staff issued an order dismissing the licensee's application for a subsequent license. By order dated September 3, 2020, the Commission directed the licensee to file a surrender application by January 31, 2021. In a January 8, 2021 filing, the licensee states it is incapable of filing a surrender application because it has no assets, Goose River Hydro, Inc. is in dissolution, and it does not have the rights to certain project features.
m.
n. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
o.
p.
Tuesday, February 9, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.
1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (This meeting will be a virtual meeting).
This meeting will be closed to the public.
Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109. Matters relating to internal personnel decisions, or internal rules and practices.
Investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes and production would disclose investigative techniques.
Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.
Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments must be received by April 5, 2021.
When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:
1.
2.
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at website address at
William N. Parham at (410) 786-4669.
This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the
1.
2.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by March 8, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using the following:
1. Access CMS' website address at website address at
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the
1.
2.
The CMS-377 form is used by ASCs to initiate both the initial and renewal survey by the State Survey Agency, which provides the certification required for an ASC to participate in the Medicare program. An ASC must complete the CMS-377 form and send it to the appropriate State Survey Agency prior to their scheduled accreditation renewal date. The CMS-377 form provides the State Survey Agency with information about the ASC facility's characteristics, such as, determining the size and the composition of the survey team on the basis of the number of ORs/procedure rooms and the types of surgical procedures performed in the ASC.
3.
4.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by March 8, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at website address at
2. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the
1.
Office of the Secretary, HHS.
Correction of notice.
This document corrects errors that appeared in the notice published in the November 7, 2019,
Ms. Karen Gorirossi or Dr. Alexander Runko at 240-453-8800.
In FR Doc. 2019-24291 of November 7, 2019 (84 FR 60097-60098), there were errors involving incorrect citations for published papers affecting six paragraphs on page 60098. The errors are identified and corrected in the Correction of Errors section below.
In FR Doc. 2019-24291 of November 7, 2019 (84 FR 60097-60098), make the following corrections:
1. On page 60098, first column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, fifth paragraph, lines 1-2, change “
2. On page 60098, first column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, twelfth paragraph, lines 1-2, change “
3. On page 60098, first column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, sixteenth paragraph, lines 1-2, change “
4. On page 60098, second column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, second paragraph,
5. On page 60098, second column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, sixth paragraph, lines 1 and 3, change “
6. On page 60098, second column, in FR Doc. 2019-24291, twenty-third paragraph, lines 1-2, change “
Office of the Secretary, HHS.
Notice.
Findings of research misconduct have been made against Yibin Lin, Ph.D. (Respondent), former postdoctoral fellow, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center (UTHealth). Respondent engaged in research misconduct in research supported by U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) funds, specifically National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), grant R01 AI125216. The administrative actions, including debarment for a period of ten (10) years, were implemented beginning on January 7, 2021, and are detailed below.
Wanda K. Jones, Dr. P.H., Acting Director, Office of Research Integrity, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 240, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 453-8200.
Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has taken final action in the following case:
ORI found that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by knowingly and intentionally falsifying, fabricating, and plagiarizing data and text reported in the following published papers, which have been retracted, and manuscripts:
• Efficient Method for Genomic DNA Mutagenesis in
• A simple and efficient method for in vitro site directed mutagenesis.
• A restriction-free method for gene reconstitution.
• Efficient Method for Protein Crystallization.
• Rice Tolerance to Drought is Complex Both Physiologically and Genetically.
• ITS2 Pretrial Gene Identification Related to Seed and Flower Identification for
• Analysis of the Deduced Amino Acid Sequence of Lectin-like Protein.
• Comprehensive proteomic characterization of ovarian tumors.
• Insight into the membrane protein localization and antibiotic resistance by fluorescence microscopy.
• Invariant States of the Algebra of Observables.
• The Biochemical Analysis the Expression Levels of Pre-synaptic, Post-synaptic, Nuclear and Mitochondrial Markers.
• The Overall Difference Analysis of Antioxidant of Isoflavone from Three Kinds of Soybean Stems.
• The Overall Difference Analysis of Antioxidant of Isoflavone from Three Kinds of Tomato.
• Invariant States of the Algebra of Observables.
ORI finds that Respondent knowingly and intentionally falsified, fabricated, and plagiarized the whole content of six (6) papers and eight (8) manuscripts, falsely created fictitious author names and affiliations without listing himself as an author to disguise himself from being the offender, and submitted them for publication in
Dr. Lin entered into a Voluntary Exclusion Agreement (Agreement) and agreed to the following:
(1) Because the Respondent also attempted to deceive the online publication sites
(2) Respondent agreed to exclude himself voluntarily from serving in any advisory capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as a consultant for a period of ten (10) years, beginning on January 7, 2021.
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. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates.
The meeting will be held as a virtual meeting and is open to the public. Individuals who plan to view the virtual meeting and need special assistance or other reasonable accommodations to view the meeting, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting website (
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: NCRA:
Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Cancer Genetics Study Section, February 22, 2021, 09:30 a.m. to February 23, 2021, 05:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, which was published in the
The meeting time changed from 8:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed to the public.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
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. 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.
This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
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. 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.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Research on Women's Health.
The meeting will be held as a virtual meeting and open to the public. Individuals who plan to view the virtual meeting and need special assistance or other reasonable accommodations to view the meeting, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting website (
Any member of the public interested in presenting oral comments to the committee may notify the Contact Person listed on this notice at least 10 days in advance of the meetings. Interested individuals and representatives of organizations may submit a letter of intent, a brief description of the organization represented, and a short description of the oral presentation. Only one representative of an organization may be allowed to present oral comments and if accepted by the committee, presentations may be limited to five minutes. Both printed and electronic copies are requested for the record. In addition, any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding their statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
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. 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.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and
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. 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.
Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Office of AIDS Research Advisory Council.
The meeting will be open to the public via NIH Videocast. The URL link to this meeting is
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
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. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
Notice is hereby given of a change in the meetings of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panels, April 20, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to April 21, 2021, 6:00 p.m., NIH, and April 22, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to April 22, 2021, 6:00 p.m., NIH, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the
The dates of the meetings changed to March 9, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to March 10, 2021, 6:00 p.m. and March 11, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to March 11, 2021, 6:00 p.m., respectively.
The meetings are closed to the public.
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. 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.
Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials and Translational Research Advisory Committee.
The meeting will be held as a virtual meeting and is open to the public. Individuals who plan to view the virtual meeting and need special assistance or other reasonable accommodations to view the meeting, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting website (
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
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. 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.
Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Advisory Eye Council, February 12, 2021, 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., National Eye Institute,
The notice is being amended to change the end of the open session from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The meeting is partially Closed to the public.
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. 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.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
The invention listed below is owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and is available for licensing as a biological material to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing.
Jeffrey Thruston at 301-594-5179 or
Technology description follows:
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 is characterized by fever, cough, difficulty breathing, loss of taste and smell, nausea, and sore throat. As of the fourth quarter 2020, COVID-19 is responsible for over 1.17 million deaths worldwide. As the pandemic continues to surge, the importance of a safe, affordable, and efficacious vaccine is of urgent importance. The present technology utilizes the well characterized vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) encoding the Ebola virus (VSV-EBOV) to express additionally a codon-optimized SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. A single intranasal or intramuscular administration of the vaccine showed protective efficacy against COVID-19 in hamsters after 4 weeks. A single intramuscular injection showed protective efficacy against COVID-19 pneumonia in rhesus macaques within 10 days. The vaccine is inexpensive to replicate, elicits a high antigen-specific antibody titer within
This technology is available for licensing, as a biological material, for commercial development in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.
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. 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.
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. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Frederick National Laboratory Advisory Committee to the National Cancer Institute.
The meeting will be held virtually and is open to the public. Individuals who plan to view the virtual meeting and need special assistance or other reasonable accommodations to view the meeting, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting website (
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and 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.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.
Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30-days of the date of this publication.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Amy Williams, Director of the Office of Advocacy Relations (OAR), NCI, NIH, 31 Center Drive, Bldg. 31, Room 10A28, MSC 2580, Bethesda, MD 20892, call non-toll-free number 240-781-3406, or email your request, including your address, to
This proposed information collection was previously published in the
In compliance with Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.
OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 18.
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. 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.
This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.
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. 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.
Office of the Secretary, DHS.
Notice.
In consultation with public health officials and consistent with the January 21, 2021
Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.
Notice.
HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410; email Colette Pollard at
This notice informs the public that HUD has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the information collection described in Section A. The
This request for OMB review involves an extension request for information collected under OMB Approval Number 2502-0527 for lenders that originate and service Section 203(k) mortgages.
The Section 203(k) program requires mortgagees to collect information about the scope of repair and improvement work, its cost, and control of escrow funds to pay for the improvements as they are completed. This program operates in conjunction with FHA's underwriting standards and systems for all Section 203(b) loans as documented in OMB Control Numbers 2502-0059 & 2502-0556. Per the existing collection, there are 1,312 respondents made up of participating lenders and 203(k) Consultants.
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(5) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. HUD encourages interested parties to submit comments in response to these questions.
Section 2 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
Notice of application.
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. has applied to be registered as an importer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to Supplemental Information listed below for further drug information.
Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before March 8, 2021. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before March 8, 2021.
Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for a hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for a hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/OALJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.
In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on December 18, 2020, Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., 2898 Manufacturers Road, Greensboro, North Carolina 27406-4600, applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s):
The company plans to import the above-controlled substance as the Federal Drug Administration-approved drug product in finished dosage form for commercial distribution to its customers. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2).
On January 29, 2021, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the District of Utah in the lawsuit entitled
The United States filed this lawsuit under the Clean Air Act alleging violations of NOx emission limits at Stericycle, Inc.'s medical waste incinerator in North Salt Lake, Utah (an ozone nonattainment area) and other related violations. The proposed consent decree will require Stericycle to pay a $600,000 civil penalty and conduct a supplemental environmental project to replace 15-20 pre-2006 diesel school buses with low emitting models at an estimated cost of $2,000,000.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the proposed consent decree. 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 $8.50 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting this EBSA-sponsored information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before March 8, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department,
Mara Blumenthal by telephone at 202-693-8538, or by email at
Section 110 of ERISA (29 U.S.C. 1030) authorizes the Secretary of Labor to prescribe alternative methods of compliance with the reporting and disclosure requirements of Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) for pension plans. Simplified Employee Pensions (SEPs) are established by section 408(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code). Although SEPs are primarily a development of the Code subject to its requirements, SEPs are also pension plans subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements of Title I of ERISA. The disclosure requirements set forth in the regulation ensure that administrators of non-model SEPs provide participants with specific written information concerning SEPs. This ICR generally requires timely written disclosure to employees eligible to participate in non-model SEPs, including specific information concerning: Participation requirements; allocation formulas for employer contributions; designated contact persons for further information; and, for employer recommended IRAs, specific terms of the IRAs such as rates of return and any restrictions on withdrawals. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number.
DOL seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) years. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal. The DOL notes that information collection requirements submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review.
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting this EBSA-sponsored information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before March 8, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Mara Blumenthal by telephone at 202-693-8538, or by email at
This information collection relates to the Department's regulation governing the procedure for filing and processing of applications for administrative exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code), and the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986 (FERSA). The regulation contains the following collections of information: (1) An applicant for an exemption must disclose information regarding the application and certify that the information is necessary in order for the Department to make an informed determination regarding the application and (2) the applicant must distribute a notice to interested parties, in which participants and beneficiaries are informed of the application for exemption and have an opportunity to respond. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number.
DOL seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3)
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting this EBSA-sponsored information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before March 8, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) if the information will be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (4) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (5) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Mara Blumenthal by telephone at 202-693-8538, or by email at
The Department's rule allows financial services firms, such as a registered investment adviser, bank, or registered broker-dealer, to provide investment advice on its proprietary investment products or other investments that would result in fees or other payments to the firm, if the firm complies with a fee-leveling requirement or the advice is furnished using a certified computer model. The regulation contains the following collections of information: (1) A fiduciary adviser must furnish an initial disclosure that provides detailed information to participants about an advice arrangement before initially providing investment advice; (2) a fiduciary adviser must engage, at least annually, an independent auditor to conduct an audit of the investment advice arrangement for compliance with the regulation; (3) if the fiduciary adviser provides the investment advice through the use of a computer model, the fiduciary adviser must obtain the written certification of an eligible investment expert as to the computer model's compliance with certain standards (
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number.
DOL seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) years. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal. The DOL notes that information collection requirements submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review.
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.
Notice of proposed settlement; request for comments.
The Copyright Royalty Judges publish for comment a proposed settlement governing royalty rates and terms for the distant retransmission of over-the-air television and radio broadcast stations by cable television systems to their subscribers.
Comments are due no later than February 25, 2021.
You may send comments, identified by docket number 20-CRB-0008-CA, online through eCRB at
Anita Blaine, Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658, or by email at
On January 26, 2021, the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) received a Joint Notice of Settlement of Participating Parties
Section 111 of the Copyright Act grants a statutory copyright license to cable television systems for the distant retransmission of over-the-air television and radio broadcast stations to their subscribers. 17 U.S.C. 111(c). In exchange for the license, cable operators submit to the Copyright Office semiannually royalty payments and statements of account detailing their retransmissions. 17 U.S.C. 111(d)(1). The Copyright Office deposits the royalties into the United States Treasury for later distribution to copyright owners of the broadcast programming that the cable systems retransmit. 17 U.S.C. 111(d)(2).
A cable system calculates its royalty payments in accordance with the statutory formula described in 17 U.S.C. 111(d)(1). Royalty rates are based upon a cable system's gross receipts from subscribers who receive retransmitted broadcast signals. For rate calculation purposes, cable systems are divided into three tiers (small, medium, and large) based on their gross receipts. 17 U.S.C. 111(d)(1)(B) through (F). Both the applicable rates and the tiers are subject to adjustment. 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(2).
Every five years persons with a significant interest in the royalty rates may file petitions to initiate a proceeding to adjust the rates. 17 U.S.C. 804(a)-(b). No person with a significant interest filed a petition to initiate a proceeding in 2020. Therefore, the Judges initiated a rate adjustment proceeding by publishing a notice and request for petitions to participate in the
Section 801(b)(7)(A) allows for the adoption of rates and terms negotiated by “some or all of the participants in a proceeding at any time during the proceeding” provided the parties submit the negotiated rates and terms to the Judges for approval. That provision directs the Judges to provide those who would be bound by the negotiated rates and terms an opportunity to comment on the agreement. Unless a participant in a proceeding objects and the Judges conclude that the agreement does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory rates or terms, the Judges adopt the negotiated rates and terms. 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(7)(A).
If the Judges adopt the proposed rates and terms pursuant to this provision for the 2020-2025 rate period, the adopted (and thus, existing) rates and terms and gross receipts limitations will continue to be binding on all cable systems that retransmit distantly over-the-air television and radio broadcast stations to their subscribers and on all copyright owners of the broadcast programming that the cable systems retransmit during the license period 2020-2025.
Interested parties may comment and Participating Parties may object to the proposed settlement referenced in this notice.
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget.
Notice of revisions to rescissions proposed pursuant to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
Pursuant to section 1014(d) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, OMB is issuing a supplementary special message from the President in regard to the rescissions proposals that were previously transmitted to the Congress on January 14, 2021 under section 1012(a) of that Act. The supplementary special message was transmitted to the Congress on January 31, 2021. The supplementary special message reports the withdrawal of all 73 proposals.
The Congress was notified on January 31, 2021.
This supplementary special message is available on-line on the OMB website at:
In accordance with section 1014(c) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 685(c)), I am withdrawing 73 proposed rescissions previously transmitted to the Congress.
The withdrawals are for the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the Interior, Justice, Labor, State, and the Treasury, as well as the African Development Foundation, the Commission of Fine Arts, the Corporation for National and Community Service, the District of Columbia, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Inter-American Foundation, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities, the National Gallery of Art, the Peace Corps, the Presidio Trust, the United States Agency for International Development, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the Legislative Branch.
The details of the rescission withdrawals are contained in the attached report.
This report updates Rescission proposals R21-1 through R21-73, which were transmitted to the Congress on January 14, 2021.
This report withdraws all of the rescission proposals transmitted on January 14, 2021.
National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence.
Notice of extension of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (the “Commission”) is publishing this notice to announce the administrative extension of an asynchronous Federal Advisory Committee meeting and paper review process. The meeting will be closed to the public.
Closed to the public, the asynchronous meeting date is extended from February 14, 2021 to February 28, 2021.
Ms. Angela Ponmakha, 703-614-6379 (Voice),
As referred to in the Commission's original
The National Science Board's Committee on Strategy, pursuant to NSF regulations, the National Science Foundation Act, and the Government in the Sunshine Act, hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:
Monday, February 8, 2021, from 10:00-11:00 a.m. EST.
This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation.
Open.
The agenda of the teleconference is: Chair's opening remarks, discussion of the next NSF strategic plan.
Point of contact for this meeting is: Kathy Jacquart,
The National Science Board's Committee on Oversight hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business as follows:
Wednesday, February 10, 2021, from 1:00-2:00 p.m. EST.
This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation.
Open.
The agenda of the teleconference is: Chair's opening remarks; presentation regarding merit review analysis; review of two proposed NSB policies; and discussion of data on careers of NSF-funded graduate students.
Point of contact for this meeting is: Ann Bushmiller,
10:00 a.m., Thursday, February 11, 2021
Via Conference Call
Parts of this meeting will be open to the public. The rest of the meeting will be closed to the public.
Audit Committee meeting.
The General Counsel of the Corporation has certified that in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552 (b)(2) and (4) permit closure of the following portion(s) of this meeting:
Everything except the Executive Session.
Executive Session.
Lakeyia Thompson, Special Assistant, (202) 524-9940;
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Application for direct and indirect transfers of licenses; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is considering approval of an application filed by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENOI), on behalf of itself, Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC (ENP), Holtec International (Holtec), and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC (HDI) (collectively, the applicants), on December 23, 2020. The application seeks NRC approval of the transfer of control of Provisional Operating License No. DPR-6 and Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-20 for Big Rock Point Plant (Big Rock Point) and Palisades Nuclear Plant (Palisades), respectively, as well as the general license for the Big Rock Point Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and the Palisades ISFSI (collectively, the licenses). Specifically, the application requests that the NRC consent to (1) the transfer of control of the licenses to Holtec and (2) the transfer of ENOI's operating authority to HDI. The NRC is also considering amending the licenses for administrative purposes to reflect the proposed transfer. The application contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI).
Comments must be filed by March 8, 2021. A request for a hearing must be filed by February 24, 2021. Any potential party as defined in § 2.4 of title 10 of the
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
Scott P. Wall, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2021-0036 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.
The NRC is considering the issuance of an order under 10 CFR 50.80 and 72.50 approving the direct and indirect transfers of control of Provisional Operating License No. DPR-6 and Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-20 for Big Rock Point and Palisades, respectively, as well as the general licenses for the Palisades and Big Rock Point ISFSIs (collectively, the licenses). Specifically, the application, dated December 23, 2020 (ADAMS Accession No. ML20358A075), requests that the NRC consent to (1) the transfer of control of the licenses to Holtec, and (2) the transfer of ENOI's operating authority (
Following approval of the proposed direct and indirect transfers of control of the licenses, Holtec Palisades, LLC, would be the licensed owners for the licenses and HDI would be the licensed operator for the licenses. HDI will contract with Comprehensive Decommissioning International, LLC to decommission Palisades.
No physical changes to the Palisades ISFSI and the Big Rock Point ISFSI or operational changes are being proposed in the application.
The NRC's regulations at 10 CFR 50.80 state that no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license, unless the Commission gives its consent in writing. The Commission will approve an application for the transfer of a license if the Commission determines that the proposed transferee is qualified to hold the license, and that the transfer is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission.
Before issuance of the proposed conforming license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. As provided in 10 CFR 2.1315, unless otherwise determined by the Commission with regard to a specific application, the Commission has determined that any amendment to the license of a utilization facility or to the license of an ISFSI, which does no more than conform the license to reflect the transfer action, involves no significant hazards consideration and no genuine issue as to whether the health and safety of the public will be significantly affected. No contrary determination has been made with respect to this specific license amendment application. In light of the generic determination reflected in 10 CFR 2.1315, no public comments with respect to significant hazards considerations are being solicited, notwithstanding the general comment procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91.
Within 30 days from the date of publication of this notice, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted as described in the
Within 20 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at
As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d), the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions that the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion that support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one that, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
Petitions must be filed no later than 20 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.
A State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 20 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
If a petition is submitted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket that is available to the public at
The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A notice granting a hearing will be published in the
For further details with respect to this application, see the application dated December 23, 2020, and the HDI PSDAR and Site-Specific Decommissioning Cost Estimate dated December 23, 2020.
Any person who desires access to proprietary, confidential commercial information that has been redacted from the application should contact the applicant by telephoning Susan H. Raimo, Entergy Services, LLC, at 202-530-7330 for the purpose of negotiating a confidentiality agreement or a proposed protective order with the applicant. If no agreement can be reached, persons who desire access to this information may file a motion with the Secretary and addressed to the Commission that requests the issuance of a protective order.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
Notice of modification of information collection.
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), seeks approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for use of a modified survey that differs only slightly from the most recently approved information collection, OSC's 2020 Annual Survey. By statute, OSC must conduct an annual survey to collect feedback from those who have contacted OSC for assistance, either by filing complaints and/or disclosures with OSC, or by seeking Hatch Act Advisory Opinions. This OSC annual survey consists of four electronic questionnaires (one for each type of assistance an individual can seek from OSC), each asking between five and ten questions. OSC invites comments on: (a) The accuracy of OSC's estimate of the burden of the proposed collections of information; (b) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (c) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.
Written comments should be received on or before March 8, 2021.
You may submit written comments by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for OSC, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503; or by email via:
Amy Beckett, Senior Litigation Counsel, by telephone at (202) 804-7000, or by email at
OSC is a permanent independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency. OSC's basic authorities come from four federal statutes: The Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment & Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). OSC's primary mission is to safeguard the merit system by protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing, and to serve as a safe channel for allegations of wrongdoing. OSC is required to conduct an annual survey of individuals who seek its assistance. OSC conducts an annual survey pursuant to Section 13 of Public Law 103-424 (1994), codified at 5 U.S.C. 1212 note, which states, in part: “[T]he survey shall—(1) determine if the individual seeking assistance was fully apprised of their rights; (2) determine whether the individual was successful either at the Office of Special Counsel or the Merit Systems Protection Board; and (3) determine if the individual, whether successful or not, was satisfied with the treatment received from the Office of Special Counsel.” The statute
OSC will use the questionnaires to survey all persons who contacted OSC for assistance during the relevant time period.
The survey questionnaires are available for review online at
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Notice.
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from July 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020.
Julia Alford, Senior Executive Resources Services, Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, Employee Services, 202-606-2246.
In accordance with 5 CFR 213.103, Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities available for use by all agencies are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency are not codified in the CFR, but the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a notice of agency-specific authorities established or revoked each month in the
No Schedule A Authorities to report during July 2020.
No Schedule B Authorities to report during July 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were approved during July 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were revoked during July 2020.
5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Notice.
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from June 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020.
Julia Alford, Senior Executive Resources Services, Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, Employee Services, 202-606-2246.
In accordance with 5 CFR 213.103, Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities available for use by all agencies are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency are not codified in the CFR, but the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a notice of agency-specific authorities established or revoked each month in the
No Schedule A Authorities to report during June 2020.
No Schedule B Authorities to report during June 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were approved during June 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were revoked during June 2020.
5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Notice.
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from November 1, 2020 to November 30, 2020.
Julia Alford, Senior Executive Resources Services, Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, Employee Services, 202-606-2246.
In accordance with 5 CFR 213.103, Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities available for use by all agencies are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency are not codified in the CFR, but the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a notice of agency-specific authorities established or revoked each month in the
No Schedule A Authorities to report during November 2020.
No Schedule B Authorities to report during November 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were approved during November 2020.
The were no Schedule C appointing authorities revoked during November 2020.
5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218.
Office of Personnel Management.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Notice.
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from August 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020.
Julia Alford, Senior Executive Resources Services, Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, Employee Services, 202-606-2246.
In accordance with 5 CFR 213.103, Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities available for use by all agencies are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency are not codified in the CFR, but the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a notice of agency-specific authorities established or revoked each month in the
No Schedule A Authorities to report during August 2020.
No Schedule B Authorities to report during August 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were approved during August 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were revoked during August 2020.
5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218.
Office of Personnel Management.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Notice.
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from October 1, 2020 to October 31, 2020.
Julia Alford, Senior Executive Resources Services, Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, Employee Services, 202-606-2246.
In accordance with 5 CFR 213.103, Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities available for use by all agencies are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency are not codified in the CFR, but the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a notice of agency-specific authorities established or revoked each month in the
(a) When the President under 42 U.S.C. 5170-5189, the Secretary of Agriculture under 7 U.S.C. 1961, or the Small Business Administration under 15 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) declares an area to be a disaster area, positions filled by time-limited appointment of employees to make and administer disaster loans in the area under the Small Business Act, as amended. Service under this authority may not exceed 7 years. Exception to this time limit may only be made with prior U.S. Office of Personnel Management approval. No one may be appointed under this authority to positions engaged in long-term maintenance of loan portfolios.
No Schedule B Authorities to report during October 2020.
The following Schedule C appointing authorities were approved during October 2020.
There were no Schedule C appointing authorities revoked during October 2020.
5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218.
On December 9, 2020, the Investors Exchange LLC (“Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange proposed to amend Rule 11.510 to eliminate the “coil” delay that is currently applied to outbound order execution messages and IEX proprietary market data sent to IEX users and the IEX system routing logic used by IEX's affiliated routing broker-dealer, IEX Services LLC (“IEXS”).
IEX's proposed elimination of the coil delay on outbound order execution messages and proprietary market data will reduce the latency on outbound communications to 37 microseconds, which latency will be due to geographic and physical distance and network connectivity.
The Exchange also proposed to make several non-substantive clarifying changes to add further detail to Rule 11.510 to: (i) Define the term “POP”;
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
IEX's coil delay on outbound order execution messages and proprietary market data, which has been in place since IEX became a registered national securities exchange in 2016, was designed to help IEX members avoid potential information leakage in connection with an execution on IEX that could reduce their ability to access liquidity on other markets after trading on IEX.
Against this backdrop, the Exchange asserts that the considerations that existed in 2016 for imposing the coil delay on its outbound order execution messages and proprietary data have been superseded by developments in the market and are now outweighed by the benefits that would be provided by the proposal—in particular, enhancement of members' ability to manage risk and market exposure through receipt of execution messages and IEX market data closer in time to when executions or quote changes occur.
Importantly, IEXS (the Exchange's affiliated routing broker) and all other IEX members will remain on equal footing in that they will experience the same 37 microseconds of latency on their receipt of IEX order execution messages and proprietary market data. As a result, IEXS will have no informational or time advantage—or resulting competitive advantage—over any other IEX member.
In addition, permitting the Exchange to modernize its infrastructure in a way that will better enable its members to manage risk and market exposure without inhibiting their ability to capture liquidity when routing orders to multiple market venues is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) goals of promoting just and equitable principles of trade, removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and protecting investors and the public interest. These goals also will be furthered by the proposal to the extent that other exchanges are better able to manage their own resting orders and routing processes through faster receipt of order messages and proprietary data from IEX. This potential effect on other exchanges, coupled with the fact that no other exchange currently imposes an artificial delay on outbound order execution messages or proprietary market data,
Finally, the Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed clarifying changes to Rule 11.510 add helpful detail that will further enhance investors' understanding of how IEX operates in a manner consistent with the Act, thereby helping to protect investors and the public interest consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the 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 Sections 902.02 and 902.11 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (the “Manual”) to defer the billing of initial listing fees payable by Acquisition Companies. The text of the. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
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.
Section 102.06 sets forth listing requirements applicable to any company with a business plan is to complete an initial public offering and engage in a merger or acquisition with one or more unidentified companies within a specific period (“Acquisition Company”). Section 902.11 provides that an Acquisition Company is subject to a flat initial listing fee of $85,000 at the time of initial listing. Based on experience listing these companies, the Exchange proposes to defer the billing and payment of initial listing fees until one year from the date of an Acquisition Company's initial listing on the Exchange. For the avoidance of doubt, such fee is owed to the Exchange at the time of initial listing based on the fee schedule in effect on the date of listing but will be billed by the Exchange and become payable on the first anniversary of the date of listing. The Exchange notes that the Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) is the Exchange's primary competitor in the market for the listing of Acquisition Companies and that Nasdaq has a deferral provision comparable to the deferral the Exchange proposes.
Acquisition Companies are formed to raise capital in an initial public offering (“IPO”) with the purpose of using the proceeds to acquire one or more unspecified businesses or assets to be identified after the IPO. However, unlike other types of listed companies that have pre-existing operations or that fund their operations by proceeds raised from the IPO, following the IPO, an Acquisition Company funds a trust account with an amount typically equal to 100% of the gross proceeds of the IPO.
The Exchange believes that the proposed fee deferral would provide an incentive to sponsors to list Acquisition Companies on the Exchange. The Exchange also believes it is reasonable to balance its need to remain competitive with other listing venues, while at the same time ensuring
The Exchange proposes to amend Section 902.02 to make it clear that the statement in that section that initial listing fees are payable at the time of listing will not be applicable to Acquisition Companies.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
As a preliminary matter, the Exchange competes for listings with other national securities exchanges and companies can easily choose to list on, or transfer to, those alternative venues. As a result, the fees the Exchange can charge listed companies are constrained by the fees charged by its competitors and the Exchange cannot charge prices in a manner that would be unreasonable, inequitable, or unfairly discriminatory.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to defer the initial listing fees charged to Acquisition Companies as set forth in Section 902.11 for one year from the date of listing is reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory because it recognizes the unique structure of Acquisition Companies that results in a sponsor's extreme fee sensitivity, particularly during the initial post-IPO period before any substantial amount of interest is earned from the trust account. Unlike other companies, which have pre-existing operations and immediate access to the IPO proceeds, Acquisition Companies are unique because at least 90%, and typically 100%, of the IPO proceeds are held in trust for the shareholders and are not available to fund the Acquisition Company's operations. Acquisition Companies also do not have any prior operations that generate cash that could be used to fund their operations. The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee deferral is reasonable in that it will create a commercial incentive for sponsors to list Acquisition Companies on the Exchange. The Exchange competes for listings, in part, by the level of its listing fees. As Nasdaq has previously adopted a one year deferral of its entry fees for Acquisition Companies, it is reasonable for the Exchange to adopt a comparable deferral to enable it to remain competitive in the market for the listing of Acquisition Companies.
The Exchange also notes that no other company will be required to pay higher fees as a result of the proposed amendments. Therefore, the Exchange believes that allowing an Acquisition Company to pay initial listing fees on a deferred basis is reasonable and not inequitable or unfairly discriminatory.
Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposal to defer such fees is consistent with the investor protection objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that they are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to a free and open market and national market system, and in general to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the amount of revenue deferred by allowing Acquisition Companies to pay initial listing fees one year from the date of listing is not substantial, and the fee deferral may result in more Acquisition Companies listing on the Exchange, thereby increasing the resources available for the Exchange's listing compliance program, which helps assure that listing standards are properly enforced and investors are protected. In addition, the Exchange believes that the market practice of depositing 100% of the gross proceeds of the IPO in a trust account for the benefit of shareholders (rather than the required 90%) benefits those shareholders and is consistent with the investor protection goals of the Act because it helps assure that shareholders exercising their right to redeem their shares for a pro rata share of the trust account will receive the full IPO price paid, rather than a lesser amount guaranteed by NYSE rules.
The Exchange believes that the potential impact on revenue from the initial listing fee deferral, as proposed, will not hinder its ability to fulfill its regulatory responsibilities.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The market for listing services is extremely competitive and listed companies may freely choose alternative venues based on the aggregate fees assessed, and the value provided by each listing. This rule proposal does not burden competition with other listing venues, which are similarly free to set their fees. The Exchange notes that Nasdaq is its primary competitor for the listing of Acquisition Companies and that Nasdaq has already adopted a deferral of its listing fees comparable to the one the Exchange is proposing. For these reasons, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition for listings.
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.
The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of January 2021. A copy of each application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at
The Commission:
Shawn Davis, Assistant Director, at (202) 551-6413 or Chief Counsel's Office at (202) 551-6821; SEC, Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-8010.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
LTSE proposes to amend LTSE Rule 14.501 to specify the process for enforcing compliance with LTSE Rule 14.425 for listed companies.
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's website at
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
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 14.501(d)(2)(A)(iii) to specify the process for enforcing compliance with the Long-Term Policies pursuant to LTSE Rule 14.425 under LTSE Rule Series 14.500.
The Exchange enforces the provisions of LTSE Rule 14.425 by ensuring that each LTSE-listed issuer has addressed all of the elements enumerated in each of the Policies, consistent with the Principles, and has made the Polices publicly available without cost.
Third, LTSE Rule 14.501 sets forth the provisions regarding the Exchange's process for notifying Companies regarding different types of deficiencies and their corresponding consequences. There are four types of Company deficiency notifications that the Exchange may issue pursuant to LTSE Rule 14.501(a): (i) Staff Delisting Determinations, which are notifications of deficiencies that, unless appealed, subject the Company to immediate suspension and delisting; (ii) notifications of deficiencies for which the Company may submit a plan of compliance for staff review; (iii) notifications of deficiencies for which a Company is entitled to an automatic cure or compliance period; and (iv) Public Reprimand Letters. LTSE Rule 14.501(d) identifies the deficiencies that fall within each of these four categories.
The proposed rule change would amend LTSE Rule 14.501(d)(2)(A)(iii) to specify that deficiencies relating to LTSE Rule 14.425 would include those for which a Company may submit a plan of compliance (“Plan of Compliance”) for staff review, similar to how other corporate governance rules are handled generally in LTSE Rule 14.501(d)(2)(A)(iii).
The process for reviewing such a Plan of Compliance is set forth in LTSE Rule 14.501(d)(2)(B) and would be unchanged. Under this subparagraph (B), LTSE may provide the Company with up to 180 days to regain compliance (with certain exceptions), issue a Staff Delisting Determination letter, or issue a Public Reprimand Letter in accordance with LTSE Rule 14.501(d)(4). As set forth in LTSE Rule 14.500(a), a Public Reprimand Letter or Staff Delisting Determination, upon timely request by a Company, is subject to review by a Listings Review Committee, which will adjudicate the request in accordance with procedures and timelines set forth in LTSE Rules 14.502, 14.504 and 14.505.
LTSE Rule 14.425 provides Companies flexibility in developing what they believe to be appropriate Policies for their businesses; however, each of the required Policies must include certain minimum elements, and must be consistent with the Principles. The Exchange has represented to the Commission that it will enforce the provisions of LTSE Rule 14.425 by ensuring that each Company has addressed all of the requirements enumerated for each of the prescribed Policies, that the Company's Policies are consistent with the Principles, and it has made the Policies publicly available without cost.
The Exchange holds that, in case of a deficiency, Companies may achieve compliance by changing Policies or practices
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change brings deficiencies with respect to LTSE Rule 14.425 in alignment with other LTSE rules pertaining to corporate governance that allow a Company to submit a Plan of Compliance in the case of a deficiency. The proposed rule change furthers the Exchange's objective to promote long-term value creation while retaining effective enforcement mechanisms for deficiencies with respect to LTSE Rule 14.425. Pursuant to the proposed amendment, Companies will be provided an opportunity to regain compliance with LTSE Rule 14.425 by formulating appropriate Policies that remain anchored to the Principles enumerated in LTSE Rule 14.425 through an existing process that has already been determined to be consistent with the Act in that it removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is fair and not unfairly discriminatory because it is applicable to all listed Companies that experience a deficiency with respect to LTSE Rule 14.425 and is part of the adjudicatory process set forth in the LTSE Rule Series 14.500.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competing venues that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The degree to which the proposed amendment could impose any burden on intermarket competition is extremely limited because other national securities exchanges may propose similar listing standards with appropriate remediation mechanisms and issuers are able to list on other national securities exchanges. Further, issuers that do not wish to meet the Exchange's listing standards also are able to list on other national securities exchanges.
LTSE also does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on intramarket competition since it is applicable to all listed Companies without differentiation. Consequently, LTSE does not believe that the proposed change will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
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 November 30, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposal so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the comments received. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 1.
This is an amendment of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of Washington dated 09/16/2020.
Issued on 01/29/2021.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
The notice of an Economic Injury declaration for the State of Washington dated 09/16/2020, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 05/26/2020 and continuing through 01/28/2021.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
The Social Security Administration (SSA) publishes a list of information collection packages requiring clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with Public Law 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. This notice includes revisions of OMB-approved information collections.
SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Mail, email, or fax your comments and recommendations on the information collection(s) to the OMB Desk Officer and SSA Reports Clearance Officer at the following addresses or fax numbers.
Comments:
Or you may submit your comments online through
I. The information collections below are pending at SSA. SSA will submit them to OMB within 60 days from the date of this notice. To be sure we consider your comments, we must receive them no later than April 5, 2021. Individuals can obtain copies of the collection instruments by writing to the above email address.
4.
Because SSA employees are Federal workers exempt from the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the burden below is only for SSA contractors.
II. SSA submitted the information collections below to OMB for clearance. Your comments regarding these information collections would be most useful if OMB and SSA receive them 30 days from the date of this publication. To be sure we consider your comments, we must receive them no later than March 8, 2021. Individuals can obtain copies of these OMB clearance packages by writing to
1.
2.
The Surface Transportation Board has received a request from Iowa State University (WB21-14—1/5/21) for permission to use data from the Board's 1992-2018 Unmasked Carload Waybill Sample. A copy of this request may be obtained from the Board's website under docket no. WB21-14.
The waybill sample contains confidential railroad and shipper data; therefore, if any parties object to these requests, they should file their objections with the Director of the Board's Office of Economics within 14 calendar days of the date of this notice. The rules for release of waybill data are codified at 49 CFR 1244.9.
Contact: Alexander Dusenberry, (202) 245-0319.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice.
This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.
Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket number and must be received on or before February 24, 2021.
Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-0386 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Jake Troutman, (202) 683-7788, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice.
This notice is provided in accordance with IRC section 6039G of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) of 1996, as amended. This listing contains the name of each individual losing United States citizenship (within the meaning of section 877(a) or 877A) with respect to whom the Secretary received information during the quarter ending December 31, 2020. For purposes of this listing, long-term residents, as defined in section 877(e)(2), are treated as if they were citizens of the United States who lost citizenship.
Departmental Offices, Department of the Treasury.
Notice of a modified system of records notice.
In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of the Treasury (Treasury), Departmental Offices proposes to modify a system of records notice relating to the Treasury system of records titled, “Department of the Treasury, Departmental Offices .227—Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) Case Management System.”
Written comments must be received by March 8, 2021. The modification will be applicable on March 8, 2021 unless Treasury receives comments and determines that changes to the system of records notice are necessary.
Written comments on this notice may be submitted electronically through the Federal government eRulemaking portal at
In general, Treasury will post all comments to
For questions about this notice and privacy issues, contact: Ryan Law, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Privacy, Transparency, and Records at U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220; telephone: (202) 622-5710.
In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), the Department of the Treasury (Treasury), Departmental Offices proposes to modify a system of records notice, 85 FR 55354, relating to the Treasury system of records titled, “Department of the Treasury, Departmental Offices .227—Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) Case Management System.” Treasury is (1) adding the authorities 44 U.S.C. 3101, and E.O. 9397 and 13478, and (2) replacing the authorities “85 FR 3112; 85 FR 3158; 85 FR 8747; 85 FR 45311” with “31 CFR part 800 (2019); 31 CFR parts 800-802 (2020), as amended”, to ensure that the public is aware of these additional authorities and to clarify the applicable regulatory authorities, even though the authorities are already publicly available in the United States Code, the
As background, in 2007, the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA), Public Law 110-49, 121 Stat. 246, was enacted. FINSA amended section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (Section 721), which delineates the authorities and jurisdiction of CFIUS. FINSA codified aspects of the structure, role, process, and responsibilities of CFIUS and the role of executive branch departments, agencies, and offices in CFIUS's review of transactions for national security concerns, and required the issuance of regulations implementing its provisions. Treasury published regulations codified at part 800 of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) pursuant to a final rule 73 FR 70702 (November 21, 2008), which implemented provisions of FINSA, and became effective as of December 22, 2008.
In 2018, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA), Subtitle A of Title XII of Public Law 115-232, 132 Stat. 2173, was enacted, which further amended Section 721 by broadening the authorities of the President and CFIUS under Section 721 to review and take action to address any national security concerns arising from certain non-controlling investments and certain real estate transactions involving foreign persons. Following the enactment of FIRRMA, on October 11, 2018, Treasury published regulations in the form of an interim rule, which amended the CFIUS regulations codified at part 800 of title 31 of the CFR to implement, and make updates consistent with, certain provisions of FIRRMA that became immediately effective (October 2018 Interim Rule).
On January 17, 2020, Treasury published two additional rules to implement provisions of FIRRMA.
Pursuant to Section 721 and its implementing regulations, CFIUS assesses or reviews, and may subsequently investigate (in the case of a review), transactions that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business and certain non-controlling investments and certain real estate transaction involving foreign persons to determine the effects of such transactions on the national security of the United States. As part of CFIUS's national security processes, Treasury, as chair of CFIUS, disseminates information submitted by parties to the transaction and other available information to certain Executive Branch agencies. Among other things, CFIUS evaluates certain personal identifier information of individuals associated with the foreign person engaged in the transaction and certain parent entities (
Further, pursuant to section 3101 of title 44 of the United States Code, “[t]he head of each Federal agency must make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency's activities.” The system of records supports CFIUS in making and preserving records as required under 44 U.S.C. 3101, and, accordingly, this modification to the system of records notice adds 44 U.S.C. 3101 as an additional legal authority for the system of records.
The system may include records from other systems of records both within Treasury and in records provided by certain other Executive Branch agencies for the purpose of facilitating CFIUS's assessment, review and investigation of transactions. Such records may include social security numbers, names, and other identifying data provided by the Social Security Administration and utilized by CFIUS pursuant to,
In maintaining its records, CFIUS is obligated to comply with its governing statute, and to the extent not inconsistent with that statute, generally applicable laws. Any records from another Treasury system of records or another Executive Branch agency's system of records for which an exemption is claimed under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) or (k), which may also be included in this system of records, retains the same exempt status such records have in the system for which such exemption is claimed.
The related information collections have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 1505-0121.
Treasury has included this established system in its inventory of record systems. Below is the description of the Treasury, Departmental Offices .227—CFIUS Case Management System.
Treasury provided a report of this system of records to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the U.S. Senate, and the OMB, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) and OMB Circular A-108, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Review, Reporting, and Publication under the Privacy Act,” dated December 23, 2016.
Department of the Treasury, Departmental Offices .227—Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) Case Management System.
Classified.
Records are maintained at the Departmental Offices: 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220.
Departmental Offices:
a. Director of Business Operations, Office of International Affairs, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220.
b. Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220.
50 U.S.C. 4565; 44 U.S.C. 3101; 31 U.S.C. 321; 5 U.S.C. 301; E.O. 9397, 11858, 12333, 12968, 13478, and 13526, as amended; 31 CFR part 800 (2019); 31 CFR parts 800-802 (2020), as amended.
85 FR 55354, September 4, 2020; 85 FR 58308, September 18, 2020.