Agricultural Marketing Service
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Army Department
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Children and Families Administration
Health Resources and Services Administration
National Institutes of Health
Fish and Wildlife Service
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Railroad Administration
Fiscal Service
Foreign Assets Control Office
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.
Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).
Interim final rule; request for comments.
CIGIE is updating its regulations relating to access, maintenance, disclosure, and amendment of records that are in a CIGIE system of records under the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act). The purpose of the update is to implement statutory changes in accordance with the provisions of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act that established the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) within CIGIE. CIGIE is giving concurrent notice of a newly established system of records pursuant to the Privacy Act for the PRAC Accountability Data System (PADS)—CIGIE-6 and this interim final rule. In this interim final rule, CIGIE exempts portions of the new system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative oversight requirements.
This interim final rule is effective May 17, 2021. Written comments may be submitted by June 16, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by “Interim Final Rule/CIGIE-6” by any of the following methods:
1.
2.
Virginia Grebasch, Senior Counsel, Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, (202) 292-2600 or
In accordance with the Privacy Act, CIGIE is proposing in a concurrently published notice a newly established system of records pursuant to the Privacy Act for the PRAC Accountability Data System (PADS)—CIGIE-6. CIGIE proposes this system of records in furtherance of the PRAC's statutory mandate to conduct oversight of funds disseminated per the CARES Act; the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2020; the Families First Coronavirus Response Act; divisions M and N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021; and any other act primarily making appropriations for Coronavirus response and related activities. CIGIE is issuing this Notice of Interim Final Rulemaking to exempt this new system of records from certain provisions of the Privacy Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), CIGIE has determined that good cause exists for waiving the general notice of proposed rulemaking and public comment procedures as to these amendments and for issuing this interim final rule without a delayed effective date. The notice and comment procedures are being waived because these amendments are being made to fulfill the requirements of the CARES Act, which took effect without delay on March 27, 2020. Additionally, these amendments specify exemptions regarding the public's access to information about themselves maintained by CIGIE. The absence of well-defined exemptions to the Privacy Act regulations could impair confidentiality and privacy rights of those who submit sensitive information to CIGIE through the PRAC and the ability of the PRAC to use that information to carry out its statutory mission.
In promulgating this amended rule, CIGIE has adhered to the regulatory philosophy and the applicable principles of regulation set forth in section 1 of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this rule is not “significant” under Executive Order 12866.
These amended regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, is not required.
These amended regulations impose no additional reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, clearance by OMB is not required.
This amended rule does not have Federalism implications, as set forth in Executive Order 13132. It will not have substantial direct effects 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.
Information, Privacy, Privacy Act, Records.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, CIGIE amends 5 CFR, part 9801, as follows:
Section 11 of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app.; 5 U.S.C. 301, 552a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Sec. 15010, Pub. L. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281.
(i)
(c)
(1) Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), CIGIE-6 is exempt from the following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G)-(H), (e)(5), and (e)(8); (f); and (g).
(2) Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and (2), CIGIE-6 is exempt from the following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1) and (e)(4)(G)-(H); and (f).
(3) Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:
(i) From subsection (c)(3) because release of disclosure accounting could alert the subjects of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of the investigation and the fact that they are subjects of the investigation, and reveal investigative interest by not only CIGIE, through the PRAC, but also by external agencies such as Federal Offices of Inspector General. Because release of such information to the subjects of an investigation would provide them with significant information concerning the nature of the investigation, release could result in the destruction of documentary evidence, improper influencing of witnesses, and other activities that could impede or compromise the investigation. In addition, accounting for each disclosure could result in the release of properly classified information which would compromise the national defense or disrupt foreign policy.
(ii) From subsection (c)(4) because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.
(iii) From the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d) because access to the records contained in this system of records could inform the subjects of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation of the existence of that investigation and of the nature and scope of the information and evidence obtained as to their activities. Such awareness by the subjects could prevent the successful completion of an investigation and/or lead to the improper influencing of witnesses, the destruction of evidence, or fabricated testimony. In addition, granting access to such information could disclose security-sensitive or confidential business information or information that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of third parties. Finally, access to the records could result in the release of classified information which would compromise the national defense or disrupt foreign policy. Amendment of the records would interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.
(iv) From subsection (e)(1) because the application of this provision could impair investigations and interfere with the law enforcement responsibilities of CIGIE through the PRAC for the following reasons:
(A) It is not possible to detect relevance or necessity of specific information in the early stages of a civil, criminal, or other law enforcement investigation, case, or matter, including investigations in which use is made of classified information. Relevance and necessity are questions of judgment and timing, and it is only after the information is evaluated that the relevance and necessity of such information can be established.
(B) During the course of any investigation, CIGIE, through the PRAC may obtain information concerning actual or potential violations of laws other than those within the scope of its jurisdiction. In the interest of effective law enforcement, the PRAC should retain this information, as it may aid in establishing patterns of criminal activity and can provide valuable leads for Federal and other law enforcement agencies.
(C) In interviewing individuals or obtaining other forms of evidence during an investigation, information may be supplied to an investigator that relates to matters incidental to the primary purpose of the investigation but which may relate also to matters under the investigative jurisdiction of another agency. Such information cannot readily be segregated.
(v) From subsection (e)(2) because, in some instances, the application of this provision would present a serious impediment to law enforcement for the following reasons:
(A) The subjects of an investigation would be placed on notice as to the existence of an investigation and would therefore be able to avoid detection or apprehension, to improperly influence witnesses, to destroy evidence, or to fabricate testimony.
(B) In certain circumstances the subjects of an investigation cannot be required to provide information to investigators, and information relating to their illegal acts, violations of rules of conduct, or any other misconduct must be obtained from other sources.
(C) In any investigation it is necessary to obtain evidence from a variety of sources other than the subjects of the investigation.
(vi) From subsection (e)(3) because the application of this provision would provide the subjects of an investigation with substantial information which could impede or compromise the investigation.
(vii) From subsection (e)(4)(G)-(I) because this system of records is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d).
(viii) From subsection (e)(5) because the application of this provision may prevent the collection of any data not shown to be accurate, relevant, timely, and complete at the moment it is collected. In the collection of information for law enforcement purposes, it is impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and complete. Material which may seem unrelated, irrelevant, or incomplete when collected may take on added meaning or significance as an investigation progresses. The restrictions of this provision could interfere with the preparation of a complete investigative report, and thereby impede effective law enforcement.
(ix) From subsection (e)(8) because the application of this provision could prematurely reveal an ongoing criminal investigation to the subjects of an investigation and could reveal
(x) From subsection (f) because CIGIE's rules are inapplicable to those portions of the system that are exempt and would place the burden on CIGIE of either confirming or denying the existence of a record pertaining to a requesting individual, which might in itself provide an answer to that individual relating to an ongoing investigation. The conduct of a successful investigation leading to the indictment of a criminal offender precludes the applicability of established agency rules relating to verification of record, disclosure of the record to that individual, and record amendment procedures for this record system.
(xi) From subsection (g) to the extent that this system is exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j)(2), (k)(1), and (k)(2) of the Privacy Act.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirming the effective date of June 7, 2021, for the direct final rule that was published in the
The effective date of June 7, 2021, for the direct final rule published March 24, 2021 (86 FR 15563), is confirmed.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2020-0274 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:
•
•
•
Alexa Sieracki, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-7509; email:
On March 24, 2021 (86 FR 15563), the NRC published a direct final rule amending its regulations in part 72 of title 10 of the
In the direct final rule, the NRC stated that if no significant adverse comments were received, the direct final rule would become effective on June 7, 2021. The NRC did not receive any comments on the direct final rule. Therefore, this direct final rule will become effective as scheduled.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Safran) Arriel 2D and Arriel 2E model turboshaft engines. This AD was prompted by the manufacturer revising the maintenance and overhaul manuals to introduce new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations and maintenance tasks. This AD requires the replacement of certain critical parts before reaching their published in-service life limits, performing scheduled
This AD is effective June 21, 2021.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of June 21, 2021.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A., 64511 Bordes—Cedex, France; phone: (33) 05 59 74 40 00; fax: (33) 05 59 74 45 15. You may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (781) 238-7759. It is also available at
You may examine the AD docket at
Wego Wang, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7134; fax: (781) 238-7199; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Safran Arriel 2D and Arriel 2E model turboshaft engines. The NPRM published in the
The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD 2018-0273, dated December 13, 2018 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to address the unsafe condition on these products. The MCAI states:
The airworthiness limitations and maintenance tasks for the SAFRAN ARRIEL 2D, ARRIEL 2E and ARRIEL 2N engines, which are approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in the SAFRAN ARRIEL 2 Maintenance and Overhaul Manuals, as applicable. These instructions have been identified as mandatory for continued airworthiness.
Failure to accomplish these instructions could result in an unsafe condition.
SAFRAN recently revised the applicable Maintenance and Overhaul Manuals (the applicable ALS), introducing new and/or more restrictive airworthiness limitations and maintenance tasks.
For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires accomplishment of the actions specified in the applicable ALS.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the costs.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.
The FAA reviewed Section 05-10-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of Chapter 05, Airworthiness Limitations—Frequencies—Inspections, of the Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2D Maintenance Manual, Volume 1, No. X 292 R1 450 2, Update No. 20, dated June 15, 2020. Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2D Maintenance Manual No. X292 R1 450 2 identifies the terms used in tables for limits and mandatory maintenance tasks, usage counters of the engine log book, life limits for life-limited parts, and mandatory inspection tasks to be carried out to reach the airworthiness objectives on Safran Arriel 2D model engines.
The FAA reviewed Section 05-10-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of Chapter 05, Airworthiness Limitations—Frequencies—Inspections, of the Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2E Maintenance Manual No. X 292 R2 300 2, Update No. 16, dated June 15, 2020. Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2E Maintenance Manual No. X292 R2 300 2 identifies the terms used in tables for limits and mandatory maintenance tasks, usage counters of the engine log book, life limits for life-limited parts, and mandatory inspection tasks to be carried out to reach the airworthiness objectives on Safran Arriel 2E model engines.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 426 engines installed on helicopters of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary corrective actions that would be required based on the results of the mandated maintenance tasks. The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these actions.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 21, 2021.
None.
This AD applies to all Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Safran) (Type Certificate previously held by Turbomeca, S.A.) Arriel 2D and Arriel 2E model turboshaft engines.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine Section.
This AD was prompted by the manufacturer revising the maintenance and overhaul manuals to introduce new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations and maintenance tasks. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the engine. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in uncontained release of a critical part, damage to the engine, and damage to the helicopter.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) Replace each critical part before reaching the in-service life limits specified in paragraph 1.C., “Table of authorized in-service life limits for the ARRIEL 2D,” or “Table of authorized in-service life limits for the ARRIEL 2E,” Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL Maintenance Manual (MM) for that engine.
(2) Before reaching the periodicity specified in paragraph 1., “Tables of Mandatory Maintenance Tasks,” table D., “Scheduled inspection,” Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM for that engine, perform all maintenance tasks specified in table D.
(3) When the engine meets the conditions specified in paragraph 1., “Tables of Mandatory Maintenance Tasks,” table E., “Unscheduled inspection,” Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM for that engine, perform the maintenance tasks specified in table E.
(4) If, during performance of the maintenance tasks required by paragraph (g)(2) or (3) of this AD, a discrepancy is found, as defined in the applicable airworthiness limitation section (ALS), perform the corrective actions specified in paragraph 1., “Tables of Mandatory Maintenance Tasks,” table D., “Scheduled inspection,” or table E. “Unscheduled inspection,” Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM for the engine.
(5) If no compliance time is identified in Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM, perform the corrective action before further flight.
Where the applicable Safran ARRIEL MM chapters provide instructions to send the Module 03 to a Safran Helicopter Engines-approved repair center, the operator may choose to send the Module 03 to any FAA-approved repair center capable of performing the required actions.
As terminating action to the requirements in paragraph (g) of this AD, within 365 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the ALS of the existing approved aircraft maintenance program (AMP) by incorporating:
(i) Task 05-10-00-150-801-A01, “Airworthiness Limitations—General,” from the applicable Safran ARRIEL MM chapter.
(ii) Task 05-10-00-200-801-A01, “Airworthiness Limitations—Authorized In-Service Life Limits,” from the applicable Safran ARRIEL MM chapter.
(iii) Task 05-10-10-200-801-A01, “Airworthiness Limitations—Tables of Mandatory Maintenance Tasks,” from the applicable Safran ARRIEL MM chapter.
(1) For the purpose of this AD, a “critical part” is a part identified in paragraph 1.C., “Table of authorized in-service life limits for the ARRIEL 2D,” or “Table of authorized in-service life limits for the ARRIEL 2E,” Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM for that engine.
(2) For the purpose of this AD, the “Chapter 05-10-00 of the Safran ARRIEL MM” is:
(i) Chapter 05-10-00 of Safran Aircraft Engines ARRIEL 2D MM No. X292 R1 450 2, Update No. 20, dated June 15, 2020; or
(ii) Chapter 05-10-00 of Safran Aircraft Engines ARRIEL 2E MM No. X292 R2 300 2, Update No. 16, dated June 15, 2020.
(3) For the purpose of this AD, the “approved maintenance program” is defined as the basis for which the operator ensures the continuing airworthiness of each operated helicopter.
(1) For affected Safran Arriel 2D model turboshaft engines, you may take credit for revising the ALS of the existing approved AMP that is required by paragraph (i) of this AD if you incorporated the tasks before the effective date of this AD using Chapter 05-10-00 of Safran ARRIEL 2D MM No. X292 R1 450 2, Update No. 19, dated December 30, 2019.
(2) For affected Safran Arriel 2E model turboshaft engines, you may take credit for revising the ALS of the existing approved AMP that is required by paragraph (i) of this AD if you incorporated the tasks before the effective date of this AD using Chapter 05-10-00 of Safran ARRIEL 2E MM No. X292 R2 300 2, Update No. 15, dated December 30, 2019.
(1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in Related Information. You may email your request to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Wego Wang, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7134; fax: (781) 238-7199; email:
(2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2018-0273, dated December 13, 2018, for more information. You may examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Section 05-10-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of Chapter 05, Airworthiness Limitations—Frequencies—Inspections, of the Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2D Maintenance Manual, Volume 1, No. X 292 R1 450 2, Update No. 20, dated June 15, 2020.
(ii) Section 05-10-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of Chapter 05, Airworthiness Limitations—Frequencies—Inspections, of the Safran Helicopter Engines ARRIEL 2E Maintenance Manual, Volume 1, No. X 292 R2 300 2, Update No. 16, dated June 15, 2020.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A., 64511 Bordes—Cedex, France; phone: (33) 05 59 74 40 00; fax: (33) 05 59 74 45 15.
(4) You may view this service information at FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (781) 238-7759.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email:
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Direct final rule.
In December 2017, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a consumer product safety standard for children's folding chairs and stools. The standard incorporated by reference the applicable ASTM voluntary standard. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) sets forth a process for updating mandatory standards for durable infant or toddler products that are based on a voluntary standard, when a voluntary standards organization revises the standard. Since 2017, ASTM has revised the voluntary standard for children's folding chairs and stools twice. Consistent with the CPSIA update process, this direct final rule updates the mandatory standard for children's folding chairs and stools to incorporate by reference ASTM's 2021 version of the voluntary standard.
The rule is effective on August 21, 2021, unless we receive significant adverse comment by June 16, 2021. If we receive timely significant adverse comments, we will publish notification in the
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2015-0029, by any of the following methods:
Keysha Walker, Compliance Officer, Office of Compliance and Field Operations, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814-4408; telephone: 301-504-6820; email:
Section 104(b)(1)(B) of the CPSIA, also known as the Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act, requires the Commission to promulgate consumer product safety standards for durable infant or toddler products. The law requires these standards to be “substantially the same as” applicable voluntary standards or more stringent than the voluntary standards if the Commission concludes that more stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of injury associated with the product.
The CPSIA also sets forth a process for updating CPSC's durable infant or toddler standards when the voluntary standard upon which the CPSC standard was based is changed. Section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA provides that if an organization revises a standard that has been adopted, in whole or in part, as a consumer product safety standard under this subsection, it shall notify the Commission. In addition, the revised voluntary standard shall be considered to be a consumer product safety standard issued by the Commission under section 9 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C. 2058), effective 180 days after the date on which the organization notifies the Commission (or such later date specified by the Commission in the
On December 15, 2017, the Commission published a final rule issuing a mandatory standard for children's folding chairs and stools that incorporated by reference the voluntary standard in effect at that time, ASTM F2613-17a,
Under section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA, unless the Commission determines that ASTM's revision of a voluntary standard that is a CPSC mandatory standard “does not improve the safety of the consumer product covered by the standard,” the revised voluntary standard becomes the new mandatory standard. As discussed below, the Commission determines that the changes made in ASTM F2613-21 are neutral or improve the safety of children's folding chairs and stools. Therefore, the Commission will allow the revised voluntary standard ASTM F2613-21 to become effective as a mandatory consumer product safety standard under the statute, effective August 21, 2021.
In February 2021, ASTM revised ASTM F2613-19. The resulting standard, ASTM F2613-21, includes the following changes:
ASTM F2613-21 makes one substantive change to the standard by updating the definition of stools in the standard to include ottomans. The Commission finds the substantive change made in ASTM F2613-21 to be an improvement to safety as it clarifies the standard's scope to include ottomans, a product previously not clearly subject to the mandatory standard.
Other changes to the standard were minor or editorial in nature as described below.
• Clarification that infant/toddler rockers are not included within the scope of the standard, because infant/toddler rockers are subject to a different voluntary standard, ASTM F3084-20,
• Removal of a previous version of a locking test method that is no longer referenced in ASTM F2613-21. The ASTM F2613-21 standard contains the current latching and locking test method that is similar to a previous version of a locking test method. Although removal of the previous version of the test method was included on an ASTM ballot, when ASTM published F2613-19, the previous locking test method was inadvertently retained in the test method section of the standard. There are no performance requirements associated with the previous locking testing method and the test method is not currently being used for testing products to the standard. Therefore, ASTM F2613-21 removed this unused test method.
The Commission finds that all of the non-substantive changes in ASTM F2613-21 are editorial in nature, and therefore, neutral regarding safety, and thus do not affect the safety of children's folding chairs and stools.
CPSC has received an inquiry from a testing laboratory regarding whether 16 CFR part 1232 was intended to apply to non-folding stools, because the title of the Part did not specifically state it applied to “folding chairs and folding stools.” Previous discussions in the preambles of the NPR (80 FR 63155, October 19, 2015) and the final rule (82 FR 59505, December 15, 2017) for the folding chairs and stools standard clearly indicate that folding stools fell within the scope of the mandatory standard. To avoid any misinterpretation regarding the scope of the standard, the Commission is amending the title of the rule to read “Safety standard for children's folding chairs and children's folding stools” and the title of the requirements in section 1232.2 to read “Requirements for children's folding chairs and children's folding stools” to remove any ambiguity regarding whether the standard to applies to children's folding stools versus non-folding stools. The rule also amends section 1232.1 regarding scope to state it establishes a standard for “children's folding chairs and children's folding stools.” For consistency, the rule makes the corresponding amendment to the notice of requirements listed in section 1112.15(b)(43) of 16 CFR part 1112 to read “16 CFR part 1232, Safety Standard for Children's Folding Chairs and Children's Folding Stools”. The rule also makes the corresponding amendment to the definition in section 1130.2(a)(13) of 16 CFR part 1130 to read “Children's folding chairs and children's folding stools.”
Section 1232.2 of the direct final rule incorporates by reference ASTM F2613-21. The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) has regulations concerning incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 51. Under these regulations, agencies must discuss, in the preamble to the final rule, ways that the materials the agency incorporates by reference are reasonably available to interested persons and how interested parties can obtain the materials. In addition, the preamble to the final rule must summarize the material. 1 CFR 51.5(b).
In accordance with the OFR's requirements, section A of this preamble summarizes the major provisions of the ASTM F2613-21 standard that the Commission incorporates by reference into 16 CFR part 1232. The standard is reasonably available to interested parties, and interested parties can purchase a copy of ASTM F2613-21 from ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959 USA; phone: 610-832-9585;
Section 14(a) of the CPSA requires that products subject to a consumer product safety rule under the CPSA, or to a similar rule, ban, standard, or regulation under any other act enforced by the Commission, be certified as complying with all applicable CPSC requirements. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a). Such certification must be based on a test of each product, or on a reasonable testing program, or, for children's products, on tests on a sufficient number of samples by a third party conformity assessment body accredited by the Commission to test according to the applicable requirements. As noted, standards issued under section 104(b)(1)(B) of the CPSIA are “consumer product safety standards.” Thus, they are subject to the testing and certification requirements of section 14 of the CPSA.
Because children's folding chairs and stools are children's products, samples of these products must be tested by a third party conformity assessment body whose accreditation has been accepted by the Commission. These products also must comply with all other applicable CPSC requirements, such as the lead content requirements in section 101 of the CPSIA, the tracking label requirement in section 14(a)(5) of the CPSA, and the consumer registration form requirements in section 104(d) of the CPSIA.
In accordance with section 14(a)(3)(B)(vi) of the CPSIA, the Commission has previously published a notice of requirements (NOR) for accreditation of third party conformity assessment bodies for testing children's folding chairs and stools (82 FR 59505, December 15, 2017). The NOR provided the criteria and process for our acceptance of accreditation of third party conformity assessment bodies for testing children's folding chairs and stools to 16 CFR part 1232. The NORs for all mandatory standards for durable infant or toddler products are listed in the Commission's rule, “Requirements Pertaining to Third Party Conformity Assessment Bodies,” codified at 16 CFR part 1112.
None of the changes to ASTM F2613-21 would impact a CPSC accepted laboratory's competence to be able to conduct testing to the revised standard. Therefore, the Commission considers the existing CPSC-accepted laboratories for testing to ASTM F2613-19 to be competent to conduct testing to ASTM F2613-21 as well. Accordingly, the existing NOR for this standard will remain in place, and CPSC-accepted third party conformity assessment bodies are expected in the normal course of renewing their accreditation to update the scope of the testing laboratories' accreditation to reflect the revised standard.
The Commission is issuing this rule as a direct final rule. Although the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) generally requires notice and comment rulemaking, section 553 of the APA provides an exception when the agency, for good cause, finds that notice and public procedure are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Commission concludes that when the Commission updates a reference to an ASTM standard that the Commission has incorporated by reference under section 104(b) of the CPSIA, notice and comment are not necessary.
Under the process set out in section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA, when ASTM revises a standard that the Commission has previously incorporated by reference as a Commission standard for a durable infant or toddler product under section 104(b)(1)(b) of the CPSIA, that revision will become the new CPSC standard, unless the Commission determines that ASTM's revision does not improve the safety of the product. Thus, unless the Commission makes such a determination, the ASTM revision becomes CPSC's standard by operation of law. The Commission is allowing ASTM F2613-21 to become CPSC's new standard. The purpose of
In Recommendation 95-4, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) endorsed direct final rulemaking as an appropriate procedure to expedite promulgating rules that are noncontroversial and that are not expected to generate significant adverse comment.
Unless we receive a significant adverse comment within 30 days, the rule will become effective on August 21, 2021. In accordance with ACUS's recommendation, the Commission considers a significant adverse comment to be one where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including an assertion challenging the rule's underlying premise or approach, or a claim that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without change. As noted, this rule merely updates a reference in the CFR to reflect a change that occurs by statute and corresponding changes to Part 1232 and two other parts for consistency and clarity.
Should the Commission receive a significant adverse comment, the Commission would withdraw this direct final rule. Depending on the comments and other circumstances, the Commission may then incorporate the adverse comment into a subsequent direct final rule or publish a notice of proposed rulemaking, providing an opportunity for public comment.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that agencies review proposed and final rules for their potential economic impact on small entities, including small businesses, and prepare regulatory flexibility analyses. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. The RFA applies to any rule that is subject to notice and comment procedures under section 553 of the APA.
The standard for children's folding chairs and stools contains information-collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The revisions to the standard made no changes to that section of the standard. Thus, the revisions will have no effect on the information-collection requirements related to the standard.
The Commission's regulations provide a categorical exclusion for the Commission's rules from any requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement where they “have little or no potential for affecting the human environment.” 16 CFR 1021.5(c). This rule falls within the categorical exclusion, so no environmental assessment or environmental impact statement is required.
Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2075(a), provides that where a consumer product safety standard is in effect and applies to a product, no state or political subdivision of a state may either establish or continue in effect a requirement dealing with the same risk of injury unless the state requirement is identical to the federal standard. Section 26(c) of the CPSA also provides that states or political subdivisions of states may apply to the CPSC for an exemption from this preemption under certain circumstances. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA deems rules issued under that provision to be “consumer product safety standards.” Therefore, once a rule issued under section 104 of the CPSIA takes effect, it will preempt in accordance with section 26(a) of the CPSA.
Under the procedure set forth in section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA, when a voluntary standard organization revises a standard upon which a consumer product safety standard was based, the revision becomes the CPSC standard within 180 days of notification to the Commission, unless the Commission determines that the revision does not improve the safety of the product, or the Commission sets a later date in the
The Congressional Review Act (CRA; 5 U.S.C. 801-808) states that, before a rule may take effect, the agency issuing the rule must submit the rule, and certain related information, to each House of Congress and the Comptroller General. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1). The submission must indicate whether the rule is a “major rule.” The CRA states that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines whether a rule qualifies as a “major rule.” Pursuant to the CRA, this rule does not qualify as a “major rule,” as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). To comply with the CRA, the Office of the General Counsel will submit the required information to each House of Congress and the Comptroller General.
Consumer protection, Incorporation by reference, Third party conformity assessment body requirements, Audit.
Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry, Consumer protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants and children, Law enforcement, Safety, Toys.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Commission amends title 16 CFR chapter II as follows:
15 U.S.C. 2063; Pub. L. 110-314, section 3, 122 Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008).
(b) * * *
(43) 16 CFR part 1232, Safety Standard for Children's Folding Chairs and Children's Folding Stools.
15 U.S.C. 2056a, 2065(b).
(a) * * *
(13) Children's folding chairs and children's folding stools;
Sec. 104, Pub. L. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016 (15 U.S.C. 2056a); Sec 3, Pub. L. 112-28, 125 Stat. 273.
This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for children's folding chairs and children's folding stools.
Each children's folding chair and children's folding stool shall comply with all applicable provisions of ASTM F2613-21,
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
Final rule.
The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (“OSHRC”) is amending its procedural rules implementing the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). The amendments closely conform with new model rules from the Administrative Conference of the United States.
Effective May 17, 2021.
Carter Tellinghuisen, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the General Counsel, by telephone at (202) 606-5410 ext. 211, by email at
OSHRC published a notice of proposed rulemaking on March 8, 2021, 86 FR 13251, which announced revisions to the Commission's rules of procedure implementing EAJA, 29 CFR part 2204, and invited interested persons to submit written comments. OSHRC received no public comments. Accordingly, the Commission now adopts the proposed rule as the agency's final rule, with one technical amendment to correct a typographical error in § 2204.301(c).
EAJA directs Federal agencies to consult with the Administrative Conference of the United States (“ACUS”) to develop procedural rules to implement the provisions of the statute. 5 U.S.C. 504(c)(1). On August 8, 2019, ACUS published Revised Model Rules for Implementation of the Equal Access to Justice Act to reflect subsequent amendments to the law and practice, and to promote greater accuracy and clarity. 84 FR 38934 (August 8, 2019). The Commission is amending its procedural rules in line with the amendments made by ACUS to the model rules.
ACUS summarized and explained its amendments in the preamble to the amended model rules and in Administrative Conference Recommendation 2019-4. 84 FR 38934, 38934 (August 8, 2019); 84 FR 38927, 38933 (August 8, 2019). To the extent applicable, the Commission relies upon the rationale ACUS provided in those documents as the basis for the amendments to the Commission's rules.
In addition, the Commission has determined that an adjustment for increases in the cost of living is appropriate in considering an applicant's request for attorney or agent fees. Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 504(b)(1)(A), the Commission revises §§ 2204.303 and 2204.406(c)(2) to allow an applicant to request, with supporting documentation, an increase in hourly fees to account for inflation as measured by the consumer price index in the relevant locality.
Administrative practice and procedure, Equal access to justice.
5 U.S.C. 504.
The Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. 504 (called “EAJA” in this part), provides for the award of attorney or agent fees and other expenses to eligible individuals and entities who are parties to certain administrative proceedings (called “adversary adjudications”) before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. An eligible party may receive an award when it prevails over the Secretary of Labor, unless the Secretary's position in the proceeding was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust. Alternatively, an eligible party, even if not a prevailing party, may receive an award under 5 U.S.C. 504(a)(4) when it successfully defends against an excessive demand made by the Secretary.
For the purposes of this part:
(1) In the administrative complaint; or
(2) Elsewhere when accompanied by an express demand for a lesser amount.
(1) An individual whose net worth did not exceed $2,000,000 at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated; or
(2) Any owner of an unincorporated business, or any partnership, corporation, association, unit of local government, or organization, the net worth of which did not exceed $7,000,000 at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated, and which had not more than 500 employees at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated; except that an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code, or a cooperative association as defined in section 15(a) of the Agricultural Marketing Act, may be a party regardless of the net worth of such organization or cooperative association. For purposes of 5 U.S.C. 504(a)(4), “party” also includes a small entity as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601.
(a) A party seeking an award under EAJA shall file an application with the judge that conducted the adversarial adjudication within 30 days after the final disposition of the adversary adjudication.
(b) The application shall identify the applicant and the proceeding for which an award is sought. The application shall show that the applicant has prevailed and identify the position of the Secretary that the applicant alleges was not substantially justified; or, if the applicant has not prevailed, shall show that the Secretary's demand was substantially in excess of the decision of the judge or Commission and was unreasonable when compared with that decision under the facts and circumstances of that case. The application shall also identify the Secretary's position(s) in the proceeding that the applicant alleges was (were) not substantially justified or the Secretary's demand that is alleged to be excessive and unreasonable. Unless the applicant is an individual, the application shall also state the number of employees of the applicant and briefly describe the type and purpose of its organization or business.
(c) The application shall also show that the applicant meets the definition of “party” in § 2204.201, including adequate documentation of its net worth, as set forth in § 2204.302.
(d) The application shall state the amount of fees and expenses for which an award is sought, subject to the requirements and limitations as set forth
(e) The application shall be signed by the applicant or an authorized officer, attorney, or agent of the applicant. It shall also contain or be accompanied by a written verification under penalty of perjury that the information provided in the application is true and correct.
(a) Each applicant except a qualified tax-exempt organization, cooperative association, or, in the case of an application for an award related to an allegedly excessive demand by the Secretary, a small entity as that term is defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(6), shall provide with its application a detailed exhibit showing the net worth of the applicant as required by § 2204.301(c) when the proceeding was initiated. The exhibit may be in any form convenient to the applicant that provides full disclosure of the applicant's assets and liabilities and is sufficient to determine whether the applicant qualifies under excessive demand as defined in § 2204.201. The judge or Commission may require an applicant to file additional information to determine its eligibility for an award.
(b) Ordinarily, the net worth exhibit will be included in the public record of the proceeding. However, an applicant that objects to public disclosure of information in any portion of the exhibit and believes there are legal grounds for withholding it from disclosure may request that the documents be filed under seal or otherwise be treated as confidential, pursuant to §§ 2200.8 and 2200.52 of this chapter.
The application shall be accompanied by adequate documentation of the fees and other expenses incurred after the initiation of the adversary adjudication, including, but not limited to, the reasonable cost of any study, analysis, engineering report, test, or project. An application seeking an increase in fees to account for inflation pursuant to § 2200.406 of this chapter shall also include adequate documentation of the change in the consumer price index for the attorney or agent's locality. With respect to a claim for fees and expenses involving an excessive demand by the Secretary, the application shall be accompanied by adequate documentation of such fees and expenses incurred after initiation of the adversary adjudication for which an award is sought attributable to the portion of the demand alleged to be excessive and unreasonable. A separate itemized statement shall be submitted for each professional firm or individual whose services are covered by the application, showing the hours spent in connection with the proceeding by each individual, a description of the specific services performed, the rate at which each fee has been computed, any expenses for which reimbursement is sought, the total amount claimed, and the total amount paid or payable by the applicant or by any other person or entity for the services provided. The judge or Commission may require the applicant to provide vouchers, receipts, or other substantiation for any fees or expenses claimed.
Any application for an award, or any accompanying documentation related to an application shall be filed and served on all parties to the proceeding in accordance with §§ 2200.7 and 2200.8 of this chapter, except as provided in § 2204.302(b) for confidential financial information.
(a) Within 30 days after service of an application, the Secretary shall file an answer to the application. Unless the Secretary requests an extension of time for filing or files a statement of intent to negotiate under paragraph (b) of this section, failure to file an answer within the 30-day period may be treated as a consent to the award requested.
(b) If the Secretary and the applicant believe that the issues in the fee application can be settled, they may jointly file a statement of their intent to negotiate a settlement. The filing of this statement shall extend the time for filing an answer for an additional 30 days, and further extensions may be granted by the judge upon request.
(c) The answer shall explain in detail any objections to the award requested and identify the facts relied on in support of the Secretary's position. If the answer is based on any alleged facts not already in the record of the proceeding, the Secretary shall include with the answer either supporting affidavits or a request for further proceedings under § 2204.405.
Within 15 days after service of an answer, the applicant may file a reply. If the reply is based on any alleged facts not already in the record of the proceeding, the applicant shall include with the reply either supporting affidavits or a request for further proceedings under § 2204.405.
The applicant and the Secretary may agree on a proposed settlement of the award before final action on the application, either in connection with a settlement of the underlying adversary adjudication, or after the adversary adjudication has been concluded, in accordance with the Commission's standard settlement procedures as set forth in § 2200.120 of this chapter. If a prevailing party and the Secretary agree on a proposed settlement of an award before an application has been filed, the application shall be filed with the proposed settlement. If a proposed settlement of an underlying proceeding provides that each side shall bear its own expenses and the settlement is accepted, no application may be filed.
(a) Ordinarily, the determination of an award will be made on the basis of the written record. However, on request of either the applicant or the Secretary, or on his or her own initiative, the judge presiding over an EAJA proceeding may, if necessary for a full and fair decision on the application, order the filing of additional written submissions; hold oral argument; or allow for discovery or hold an evidentiary hearing, but only as to issues other than whether the agency's position was substantially justified (such as those involving the applicant's eligibility or substantiation of fees and expenses). Any written submissions shall be made, oral argument held, discovery conducted, and evidentiary hearing held as promptly as possible so as not to delay a decision on the application for fees. Whether or not the position of the Secretary was substantially justified shall be determined on the basis of the administrative record, as a whole, which is made in the adversary adjudication for which fees and other expenses are sought.
(b) A request for further proceedings under this section shall specifically identify the information sought or the disputed issues and shall explain why the additional proceedings are necessary to resolve the issues.
The preparation and issuance of decision on the fee application shall be in accordance with § 2200.90 of this chapter.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(1) Awards shall be based on rates customarily charged by persons engaged in the business of acting as attorneys, agents and expert witnesses, even if the services were made available without charge or at a reduced rate to the applicant.
(2) An award for the fee of an attorney or agent under this paragraph (c) shall not exceed the hourly rate specified in 5 U.S.C. 504(b)(1)(A), except to account for inflation since the last update of the statute's maximum award upon the request of the applicant as documented in the application pursuant to § 2204.303. An award to compensate an expert witness shall not exceed the highest rate at which the Secretary pays expert witnesses. However, an award may include the reasonable expenses of the attorney, agent or witness as a separate item, if the attorney, agent or witness ordinarily charges clients separately for such expenses.
(3) In determining the reasonableness of the fee sought for an attorney, agent, or expert witness, the following shall be considered:
(i) If the attorney, agent, or witness is in private practice, his or her customary fee for similar services, or, if an employee of the applicant, the fully allocated cost of the services;
(ii) The prevailing rate for similar services in the community in which the attorney, agent, or witness ordinarily perform services;
(iii) The time actually spent in the representation of the applicant;
(iv) The time reasonably spent in light of the difficulty or complexity of the issues in the proceeding; and
(v) Such other factors as may bear on the value of the services provided.
(4) The reasonable cost of any study, analysis, engineering report, test, project, or similar matter prepared on behalf of the party may be awarded, to the extent that the charge for the service does not exceed the prevailing rate for similar services, and the study or other matter was necessary for preparation of the applicant's case.
Either the applicant or the Secretary may seek review of the judge's decision on the fee application, and the Commission may grant such a petition for review or direct review of the decision on the Commission's own initiative. Review by the Commission shall be in accordance with §§ 2200.91 and 2200.92 of this chapter.
Judicial review of final decisions on awards may be sought as provided in 5 U.S.C. 504(c)(2).
Any proceedings on an application for fees under this part shall be automatically stayed until the adversary adjudication has become a final disposition.
After reasonable notice to the parties, the judge or the Commission may waive, for good cause shown, any provision contained in this part as long as the waiver is consistent with the terms and purpose of the EAJA.
An applicant seeking payment of an award shall submit to the officer designated by the Secretary a copy of the Commission's final decision granting the award, accompanied by a certification that the applicant will not seek review of the decision in the United States courts.
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
Final rule.
The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is amending the Narcotics Trafficking Sanctions Regulations and the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions Regulations to add or amend general licenses with respect to payments for legal services, certain transactions for personal maintenance, certain transactions for maintenance of blocked tangible property, and emergency medical services. In addition, OFAC is amending certain prohibitions, definitions, and interpretive sections contained in these sets of regulations. OFAC is also updating certain regulatory provisions and making other technical and conforming edits.
This rule is effective May 17, 2021.
OFAC: Assistant Director for Licensing, 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, 202-622-4855; or Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, 202-622-2490.
This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website
OFAC administers two sanctions programs with respect to narcotics trafficking. The Narcotics Trafficking Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 536 (NTSR), implement Executive Order (E.O.) 12978 of October 21, 1995, “Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions With Significant Narcotics Traffickers” (60 FR 54579, October 24, 1995), as amended by E.O. 13286 of February 28, 2003, “Amendment of Executive Orders, and Other Actions, in Connection With the Transfer of Certain Functions to the Secretary of Homeland Security” (68 FR 10619, March 3, 2003), in which the President declared a national emergency, and imposed sanctions, with respect to “the actions
The Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 598 (FNKSR), implement the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 1901-1908), which provides authority for the application of sanctions to significant foreign narcotics traffickers and their organizations operating worldwide.
OFAC is adopting this final rule amending the NTSR and the FNKSR with respect to general licenses for payments for legal services, certain transactions for personal maintenance, certain transactions for maintenance of blocked tangible property, and emergency medical services, as set forth in more detail below. OFAC is also amending certain prohibitions, definitions, and interpretive sections, updating certain regulatory provisions, and making other technical and conforming edits, as also described below.
First, new § 536.507 of the NTSR and new § 598.508 of the FNKSR now authorize payments from funds originating outside the United States and that do not come from a U.S. person or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked, other than the person to whom or on whose behalf the authorized legal services are provided.
Second, new § 536.508 of the NTSR and new § 598.509 of the FNKSR now authorize payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses from public funds in connection with authorized legal services rendered on behalf of blocked persons.
OFAC also is amending the definition of
Because the NFSR and the FNKSR involve a foreign affairs function, the provisions of E.O. 12866 of September 30, 1993, “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunity for public participation, and delay in effective date are inapplicable. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) does not apply.
The collections of information related to the NTSR and the FNKSR are contained in 31 CFR part 501 (the “Reporting, Procedures and Penalties Regulations”). Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), those collections of information have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1505-0164. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid control number.
Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, Banking, Blocking of assets, Credit, Currency, Drug traffic control, Foreign investments in U.S., Narcotics trafficking, Foreign trade, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sanctions, Securities, Specially designated narcotics traffickers, Transfer of assets.
Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, Banking, Blocking of assets, Credit, Currency, Drug traffic control, Foreign investments in U.S., Narcotics trafficking, Foreign trade, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sanctions, Securities, Significant foreign narcotics traffickers, Specially designated narcotics traffickers, Transfer of assets.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control amends 31 CFR parts 536 and 598 as follows:
3 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651, 1701-1706; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); E.O. 12978, 60 FR 54579, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 415; E.O. 13286, 68 FR 10619, 3 CFR, 2003 Comp., p. 166.
(a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that come within the United States, or that are or come within the possession or control of any U.S. person, of a specially designated narcotics trafficker are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.
(b) The prohibitions in paragraph (a) of this section include prohibitions on the following transactions:
(1) The making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, other than donations of articles, such as food, clothing, and medicine, intended to be used to relieve human suffering; and
(2) The receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Unless authorized by this part or by a specific license expressly referring to this part, any dealing in securities (or evidence thereof) held within the possession or control of a U.S. person and either registered or inscribed in the name of, or known to be held for the benefit of, or issued by, a specially designated narcotics trafficker is prohibited. This prohibition includes the transfer (including the transfer on the books of any issuer or agent thereof), disposition, transportation, importation, exportation, or withdrawal of, or the endorsement or guaranty of signatures on, any securities on or after the effective date. This prohibition applies irrespective of the fact that at any time (whether prior to, on, or subsequent to the effective date) the registered or inscribed owner of any such securities may have or might appear to have assigned, transferred, or otherwise disposed of the securities.
(d) The prohibitions in paragraph (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this part, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date.
Sections 501.806 and 501.807 of this chapter describe the procedures to be followed by persons seeking, respectively, the unblocking of funds that they believe were blocked due to mistaken identity, and administrative reconsideration of their status as persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this section.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (e) or (f) of this section, or as otherwise directed or authorized by OFAC, any U.S. person holding funds, such as currency, bank deposits, or liquidated financial obligations, subject to § 536.201 shall hold or place such funds in a blocked interest-bearing account located in the United States.
(b)(1) For purposes of this section, the term
(i) In a federally insured U.S. bank, thrift institution, or credit union, provided the funds are earning interest at rates that are commercially reasonable; or
(ii) With a broker or dealer registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
(2) Funds held or placed in a blocked account pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section may not be invested in instruments the maturity of which exceeds 180 days.
(c) For purposes of this section, a rate is commercially reasonable if it is the rate currently offered to other depositors on deposits or instruments of comparable size and maturity.
(d) For purposes of this section, if interest is credited to a separate blocked account or subaccount, the name of the account party on each account must be the same.
(e) Blocked funds held in instruments the maturity of which exceeds 180 days at the time the funds become subject to § 536.201 may continue to be held until maturity in the original instrument, provided any interest, earnings, or other proceeds derived therefrom are paid into a blocked interest-bearing account in accordance with paragraphs (a) or (f) of this section.
(f) Blocked funds held in accounts or instruments outside the United States at the time the funds become subject to § 536.201 may continue to be held in the same type of accounts or instruments, provided the funds earn interest at rates that are commercially reasonable.
(g) This section does not create an affirmative obligation for the holder of blocked tangible property, such as real or personal property, or of other blocked property, such as debt or equity securities, to sell or liquidate such property. However, OFAC may issue licenses permitting or directing such sales or liquidation in appropriate cases.
(h) Funds subject to this section may not be held, invested, or reinvested in a manner that provides financial or economic benefit or access to a specially designated narcotics trafficker, nor may their holder cooperate in or facilitate the pledging or other attempted use as collateral of blocked funds or other assets.
(a) Any transaction on or after the effective date that has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited.
(a) Except as otherwise authorized, and notwithstanding the existence of any rights or obligations conferred or imposed by any international agreement or contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date, all expenses incident to the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 536.201 shall be the responsibility of the owners or operators of such property, which expenses shall not be met from blocked funds.
(b) Property blocked pursuant to § 536.201 may, in the discretion of OFAC, be sold or liquidated and the net proceeds placed in a blocked interest-bearing account in the name of the owner of the property.
The definitions in this subpart apply throughout the entire part.
The terms
The term
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this part, the term
(b) The term
(c) The term
The term
(a) Persons listed in the Annex to Executive Order 12978 of October 24, 1995, as amended;
(b) Foreign persons designated by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Secretary of State, because they are found:
(1) To play a significant role in international narcotics trafficking centered in Colombia; or
(2) Materially to assist in, or provide financial or technological support for or goods or services in support of, the narcotics trafficking activities of specially designated narcotics traffickers;
(c) Persons determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Secretary of State, to be owned or controlled by, or to act for or on behalf of, any other specially designated narcotics trafficker; and
(d) Entities owned in the aggregate, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or
The names of persons determined to fall within paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, whose property and interests in property therefore are blocked pursuant to § 536.201, are published in the
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706), in Section 203 (50 U.S.C. 1702), authorizes the blocking of the property and interests in property of a person during the pendency of an investigation. The names of persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pending investigation pursuant to § 536.201 also are published in the
Sections 501.806 and 501.807 of this chapter describe the procedures to be followed by persons seeking, respectively, the unblocking of funds that they believe were blocked due to mistaken identity, or administrative reconsideration of their status as persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this part.
The term
The definition of finance listed above is specific to this part and not any other parts of Chapter 31.
The terms
The term
(a) The prohibitions on transactions contained in § 536.201 apply to services performed in the United States or by U.S. persons, wherever located, including by a foreign branch of an entity located in the United States:
(1) On behalf of or for the benefit of a specially designated narcotics trafficker; or
(2) With respect to property interests of a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
(b) For example, U.S. persons may not, except as authorized by or pursuant to this part, provide legal, accounting, financial, brokering, freight forwarding, transportation, public relations, or other services to a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
The prohibitions in § 536.201 on transactions or dealings involving blocked property, as defined in § 536.301, apply to transactions by any U.S. person in a location outside the United States.
The prohibition in § 536.201 on dealing in property subject to that section prohibits U.S. financial institutions from performing under any existing credit agreements, including charge cards, debit cards, or other credit facilities issued by a financial institution to a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
Unless specifically authorized by OFAC pursuant to this part, no charitable contribution of funds, goods, services, or technology, except donations of articles, such as food, clothing, and medicine, intended to relieve human suffering, may be made by, to, or for the benefit of, or received from, a specially designated narcotics trafficker. For the purposes of this part, a contribution is made by, to, or for the benefit of, or received from, a specially designated narcotics trafficker if made by, to, or in the name of, or received from or in the name of, such a person; if made by, to, or in the name of, or received from or in the name of, an entity or individual acting for or on behalf of, or owned or controlled by, such a person; or if made in an attempt to violate, to evade, or to avoid the bar on the provision of contributions by, to, or for the benefit of such a person, or the receipt of contributions from such a person.
(a) The provision of the following legal services to or on behalf of specially designated narcotics traffickers is authorized, provided that any receipt of payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses must be authorized pursuant to § 536.507 or 536.508, which authorize certain payments for legal services; via specific licenses; or otherwise pursuant to this part:
(1) Provision of legal advice and counseling on the requirements of and compliance with the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States, provided that such advice and counseling are not provided to facilitate transactions in violation of this part;
(2) Representation of persons named as defendants in or otherwise made parties to legal, arbitration, or administrative proceedings before any U.S. federal, state, or local court or agency;
(3) Initiation and conduct of legal, arbitration, or administrative
(4) Representation of persons before any U.S. federal, state, or local court or agency with respect to the imposition, administration, or enforcement of U.S. sanctions against such persons; and
(5) Provision of legal services in any other context in which prevailing U.S. law requires access to legal counsel at public expense.
(b) The provision of any other legal services to specially designated narcotics traffickers not otherwise authorized in this part, requires the issuance of a specific license.
(c) U.S. persons do not need to obtain specific authorization to provide related services, such as making filings and providing other administrative services, that are ordinarily incident to the provision of services authorized by this paragraph. Additionally, U.S. persons who provide services authorized by this section do not need to obtain specific authorization to contract for related services that are ordinarily incident to the provision of those legal services, such as those provided by private investigators or expert witnesses, or to pay for such services.
(d) Entry into a settlement agreement or the enforcement of any lien, judgment, arbitral award, decree, or other order through execution, garnishment, or other judicial process purporting to transfer or otherwise alter or affect property or interests in property blocked pursuant to § 536.201 is prohibited unless licensed pursuant to this part.
Pursuant to part 501, subpart E, of this chapter, U.S. persons seeking administrative reconsideration or judicial review of their designation or the blocking of their property and interests in property may apply for a specific license from OFAC to authorize the release of certain blocked funds for the payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses for the provision of such legal services where alternative funding sources are not available
(a)
(i) A source within the United States;
(ii) Any source, wherever located, within the possession or control of a U.S. person; or
(iii) Any individual or entity, other than the person on whose behalf the legal services authorized pursuant to § 536.506(a) are to be provided, whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute.
(2) Nothing in this paragraph authorizes payments for legal services using funds in which a specially designated narcotics trafficker, or any other person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to any other part of this chapter, or any Executive order or statute has an interest.
(b) Reports. (1) U.S. persons who receive payments pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section must submit annual reports no later than 30 days following the end of the calendar year during which the payments were received providing information on the funds received. Such reports shall specify:
(i) The individual or entity from whom the funds originated and the amount of funds received; and
(ii) If applicable:
(A) The names of any individuals or entities providing related services to the U.S. person receiving payment in connection with authorized legal services, such as private investigators or expert witnesses;
(B) A general description of the services provided; and
(C) The amount of funds paid in connection with such services.
(2) The reports, which must reference this section, are to be submitted to OFAC using one of the following methods:
(i)
(ii)
U.S. persons that are attorneys, law firms, or legal services organizations are authorized to receive payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses from public funds for the provision of legal services authorized by § 536.506(a).
(a) Individuals who are specially designated narcotics traffickers who are in U.S. custody or incarcerated in jails, prisons, or similar facilities in the United States (“covered individuals”), are authorized to engage in the following transactions within the United States:
(1) Purchasing, making payment for, and receiving goods and services for their maintenance and the maintenance of their spouse or persons who would ordinarily share a common dwelling as a family with them, located in the United States, including food, clothing, housing, medical care, education, transportation, insurance, and utilities;
(2) Obtaining or continuing employment and engaging in all transactions ordinarily incident to such employment, including receipt of salary and benefits;
(3) Establishing accounts with a U.S. financial institution, or a commissary-type account with a prison, jail, or other similar facility, located in the United States, for use in connection with the transactions authorized in paragraph (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section; and
(4) Receiving and making funds transfers in furtherance of the authorized transactions set forth in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section from unblocked funds originating within or outside the United States, provided that any funds received may not originate from any individual or entity whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute, other than the covered individual or his or her spouse or persons who would ordinarily share a common dwelling as a family with the covered individual.
(b) Any financial institution that has established any account pursuant to paragraph (a)(3) of this section, excluding commissary-type accounts with prisons, jails, or other similar facilities, must provide the name and address of the financial institution, the name of the account holder, and the account number to OFAC within 10 business days of the establishment of the account.
(c) This general license does not authorize any funds transfers to any location outside the United States.
A covered individual has an interest in any funds remaining in a commissary-type account
In the case of individuals who are in custody or incarcerated, funds transfers must be authorized by and consistent with the conditions, protocols, and other requirements established by the jail, prison, or other facility.
The authorization in this section only applies to laws and regulations administered by OFAC and should not be interpreted to excuse compliance with other applicable laws or regulations, including the immigration laws of the United States.
(a) Specially designated narcotics traffickers are authorized to engage in the following transactions:
(1) Making payment for and receiving goods and services for the maintenance of blocked tangible property required pursuant to § 536.206; and
(2) Receiving and making funds transfers in furtherance of the authorized transactions set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section from unblocked funds originating outside the United States, provided that any funds received may not originate from any individual or entity whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute, other than the specially designated narcotics trafficker(s), who owns the property.
(b)(1) Any person making payment for or receiving goods and services for the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 536.201 and authorized by paragraph (a)(1) of this section must file a report on the transactions with OFAC within 30 days of the first transaction related to that property and annually thereafter. Such reports shall include the following numbered sections and information:
(i) Estimated or actual dollar value of the transaction(s), as determined by the value of the payment, goods, or services;
(ii) A description of the blocked property;
(iii) The parties involved;
(iv) The type and scope of transactions conducted; and
(v) The dates and duration of the transactions.
(2) The reports, which must reference this section, are to be submitted to OFAC using one of the following methods:
(i)
(ii)
The provision and receipt of nonscheduled emergency medical services that are prohibited by this part are authorized.
3 U.S.C. 301; 21 U.S.C. 1901-1908; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended (28 U.S.C. 2461 note).
(a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that come within the United States, or that are or come within the possession or control of any U.S. person, of a specially designated narcotics trafficker are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.
Sections 501.806 and 501.807 of this chapter describe the procedures to be followed by persons seeking, respectively, the unblocking of funds that they believe were blocked due to mistaken identity, and administrative reconsideration of their status as persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
(b) The prohibitions in paragraph (a) of this section include prohibitions on the following transactions:
(1) The making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section; and
(2) The receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Unless authorized by this part or by a specific license expressly referring to this part, any dealing in securities (or evidence thereof) held within the possession or control of a U.S. person and either registered or inscribed in the name of, or known to be held for the benefit of, or issued by, a specially designated narcotics trafficker is prohibited. This prohibition includes the transfer (including the transfer on the books of any issuer or agent thereof), disposition, transportation, importation, exportation, or withdrawal of, or the endorsement or guaranty of signatures on, any securities on or after the effective date. This prohibition applies irrespective of the fact that at any time (whether prior to, on, or subsequent to the effective date) the registered or inscribed owner of any such securities may have or might appear to have assigned, transferred, or otherwise disposed of the securities.
(d) The prohibitions in paragraph (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this part, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date.
(a) Any transaction on or after the effective date that has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (e) or (f) of this section, or as otherwise directed or authorized by OFAC, any U.S. person holding funds, such as currency, bank deposits, or liquidated financial obligations, subject to § 598.202 shall hold or place such funds in a blocked interest-bearing account located in the United States.
(b)(1) For purposes of this section, the term
(i) In a federally insured U.S. bank, thrift institution, or credit union, provided the funds are earning interest at rates that are commercially reasonable; or
(ii) With a broker or dealer registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
(2) Funds held or placed in a blocked account pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section may not be invested in instruments the maturity of which exceeds 180 days.
(c) For purposes of this section, a rate is commercially reasonable if it is the rate currently offered to other depositors on deposits or instruments of comparable size and maturity.
(d) For purposes of this section, if interest is credited to a separate blocked account or subaccount, the name of the account party on each account must be the same.
(e) Blocked funds held in instruments the maturity of which exceeds 180 days at the time the funds become subject to § 598.202 may continue to be held until maturity in the original instrument, provided any interest, earnings, or other proceeds derived therefrom are paid into a blocked interest-bearing account in accordance with paragraphs (a) or (f) of this section.
(f) Blocked funds held in accounts or instruments outside the United States at the time the funds become subject to § 598.202 may continue to be held in the same type of accounts or instruments, provided the funds earn interest at rates that are commercially reasonable.
(g) This section does not create an affirmative obligation for the holder of blocked tangible property, such as real or personal property, or of other blocked property, such as debt or equity securities, to sell or liquidate such property. However, OFAC may issue licenses permitting or directing such sales or liquidation in appropriate cases.
(h) Funds subject to this section may not be held, invested, or reinvested in a manner that provides immediate financial or economic benefit or access to any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 598.202, nor may their holder cooperate in or facilitate the pledging or other attempted use as collateral of blocked funds or other assets.
(a) Except as otherwise authorized, and notwithstanding the existence of any rights or obligations conferred or imposed by any international agreement or contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date, all expenses incident to the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 598.202 shall be the responsibility of the owners or operators of such property, which expenses shall not be met from blocked funds.
(b) Property blocked pursuant to § 598.202 may, in the discretion of OFAC, be sold or liquidated and the net proceeds placed in a blocked interest-bearing account in the name of the owner of the property.
The definitions in this subpart apply throughout the entire part.
The terms
The term
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this part, the term
(b) The term
(c) The term
The term
On May 15, 2015, the functions conferred upon the President by sections 804(b) and (h) of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 1903(b) and (h)), were delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury.
The term
(a) Significant foreign narcotics traffickers; and
(b) Foreign persons designated by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of State, because they are found to be:
(1) Materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of a specially designated narcotics trafficker;
(2) Owned, controlled, or directed by, or acting for or on behalf of, a specially designated narcotics trafficker; or
(3) Playing a significant role in international narcotics trafficking; and
(c) Entities owned in the aggregate, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more specially designated narcotics traffickers.
The names of persons determined to fall within paragraph (a) or (b) of this definition, whose property and interests in property therefore are blocked pursuant to this part, are published in the
The Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 1901-1908), in Section 806 (21 U.S.C. 1905), authorizes the blocking of property and interests in property of a person during the pendency of an investigation. The names of persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pending investigation pursuant to this part also are published in the
Sections 501.806 and 501.807 of this chapter describe the procedures to be followed by persons seeking, respectively, the unblocking of funds that they believe were blocked due to mistaken identity, or administrative reconsideration of their status as persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this part.
The term
The definition of
The term
A setoff against blocked property (including a blocked account), whether by a U.S. bank or other U.S. person, is a prohibited transfer under § 598.202 if effected after the effective date.
(a) The prohibitions on transactions contained in § 598.202 apply to services performed in the United States or by U.S. persons, wherever located, including by a foreign branch of an entity located in the United States:
(1) On behalf of or for the benefit of a specially designated narcotics trafficker; or
(2) With respect to property interests of a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
(b) For example, U.S. persons may not, except as authorized by or pursuant to this part, provide legal, accounting, financial, brokering, freight forwarding, transportation, public relations, or other services to a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
The prohibitions in § 598.202 on transactions or dealings involving blocked property, as defined in § 598.301, apply to transactions by any U.S. person in a location outside the United States.
The prohibition in § 598.202 on dealing in property subject to that section prohibits U.S. financial institutions from performing under any existing credit agreements, including charge cards, debit cards, or other credit facilities issued by a financial institution to a specially designated narcotics trafficker.
Unless specifically authorized by OFAC pursuant to this part, no charitable contribution of funds, goods, services, or technology, including contributions to relieve human suffering, such as food, clothing, or medicine, may be made by, to, or for the benefit of, or received from, a specially designated narcotics trafficker. For the purposes of this part, a contribution is made by, to, or for the benefit of, or received from, a specially designated narcotics trafficker if made by, to, or in the name of, or received from or in the name of, such a person; if made by, to, or in the name of, or received from or in the name of, an entity or individual acting for or on behalf of, or owned or controlled by, such a person; or if made in an attempt to violate, to evade, or to avoid the bar on the provision of contributions by, to, or for the benefit of such a person, or the receipt of contributions from such a person.
(a) The provision of the following legal services to or on behalf of a specially designated narcotics trafficker is authorized, provided that any receipt of payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses must be authorized pursuant to §§ 598.508 and 598.509, which authorize certain types of payments for legal services; via specific license; or otherwise pursuant to this part:
(1) Provision of legal advice and counseling on the requirements of and compliance with the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States, provided that such advice and counseling are not provided to facilitate transactions in violation of this part;
(2) Representation of persons when named as defendants in or otherwise made parties to legal, arbitration, or administrative proceedings before any U.S. federal, state, or local court or agency;
(3) Initiation and conduct of legal, arbitration, or administrative proceedings before any U.S. federal, state, or local court or agency;
(4) Representation of persons before any U.S. federal, state, or local court or agency with respect to the imposition, administration, or enforcement of U.S. sanctions against such persons; and
(5) Provision of legal services in any other context in which prevailing U.S. law requires access to legal counsel at public expense.
(b) The provision of any other legal services to specially designated narcotics traffickers, not otherwise authorized in this part, requires the issuance of a specific license.
(c) U.S. persons do not need to obtain specific authorization to provide related services, such as making filings and providing other administrative services, that are ordinarily incident to the provision of services authorized by this paragraph. Additionally, U.S. persons who provide services authorized by this paragraph do not need to obtain specific authorization to contract for related services that are ordinarily incident to the provision of those legal services, such as those provided by private investigators or expert witnesses, or to pay for such services.
(d) Entry into a settlement agreement or the enforcement of any lien, judgment, arbitral award, decree, or other order through execution, garnishment, or other judicial process purporting to transfer or otherwise alter or affect property or interests in property blocked pursuant to § 598.202(a), is prohibited unless licensed pursuant to this part.
Pursuant to part 501, subpart E, of this chapter, U.S. persons seeking administrative reconsideration or judicial review of their designation or the blocking of their property and interests in property may apply for a specific license from OFAC to authorize the release of certain blocked funds necessary for the payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses where alternative funding sources are not available.
(a)
(i) A source within the United States;
(ii) Any source, wherever located, within the possession or control of a U.S. person; or
(iii) Any individual or entity, other than the person on whose behalf the legal services authorized pursuant to § 598.507(a) are to be provided, whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute.
(2) This paragraph authorizes the blocked person on whose behalf the legal services authorized pursuant to § 598.507(a) are to be provided to make payments for authorized legal services using funds originating outside the United States that were not previously blocked.
(b)
(i) The individual or entity from whom the funds originated and the amount of funds received; and
(ii) If applicable:
(A) The names of any individuals or entities providing related services to the U.S. person receiving payment in connection with authorized legal services, such as private investigators or expert witnesses;
(B) A general description of the services provided; and
(C) The amount of funds paid in connection with such services.
(2) The reports, which must reference this section, are to be submitted to OFAC using one of the following methods:
(i)
(ii)
U.S. persons that are attorneys, law firms, or legal services organizations are authorized to receive payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses from public funds for the provision of legal services authorized by § 598.507(a).
(a) Individuals who are specially designated narcotics traffickers who are in U.S. custody or incarcerated in jails, prisons, or similar facilities in the United States (“covered individuals”), are authorized to engage in the following transactions within the United States:
(1) Purchasing, making payment for, and receiving goods and services for their maintenance and the maintenance of their spouse or persons who are sharing or who would ordinarily share a common dwelling as a family with them, located in the United States, including food, clothing, housing, medical care, education, transportation, insurance, and utilities;
(2) Obtaining or continuing employment and engaging in all transactions ordinarily incident to such employment, including receipt of salary and benefits;
(3) Establishing accounts with a U.S. financial institution, or a commissary-type account with a prison, jail, or other similar facility, located in the United States, for use in connection with the transactions authorized in paragraph (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section; and
(4) Receiving and making funds transfers in furtherance of the authorized transactions set forth in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section from unblocked funds originating within or outside the United States, provided that any funds received may not originate from any individual or entity whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute, other than the covered individual or his or her spouse or persons who are sharing or who would ordinarily share a common dwelling as a family with the covered individual.
(b) Any financial institution that has established any account pursuant to paragraph (a)(3) of this section, excluding commissary-type accounts with prisons, jails, or other similar facilities, must provide the name and address of the financial institution, the name of the account holder, and the account number to OFAC within 10 business days of the establishment of the account.
(c) This general license does not authorize any funds transfers to any location outside the United States.
A covered individual has an interest in any funds remaining in a commissary-type account with a prison, jail, or other similar facility established pursuant to paragraph (a)(3) of
In the case of individuals who are in custody or incarcerated, funds transfers must be authorized by and consistent with the conditions, protocols, and other requirements established by the jail, prison, or other facility.
The authorization in this section only applies to laws and regulations administered by OFAC and should not be interpreted to excuse compliance with other applicable laws or regulations, including the immigration laws of the United States.
(a) Specially designated narcotics traffickers are authorized to engage in the following transactions:
(1) Making payment for and receiving goods and services for the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 598.202(a); and
(2) Receiving and making funds transfers in furtherance of the authorized transactions set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section from unblocked funds originating outside the United States, provided that any funds received may not originate from any individual or entity whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute, other than the specially designated narcotics trafficker(s) who owns the property.
(b)(1) Any person making payment for or receiving goods and services for the maintenance of tangible property blocked pursuant to § 598.202(a) authorized by paragraph (a)(1) of this section must file a report on the transactions with OFAC within 30 days of the first transaction related to that property. Such reports shall include the following numbered sections and information:
(i) Estimated or actual dollar value of the transaction(s), as determined by the value of the payment, goods, or services;
(ii) A description of the blocked property;
(iii) The parties involved;
(iv) The type and scope of transactions conducted; and
(iv) The dates and duration of the transactions.
(2) The reports, which must reference this section, are to be submitted to OFAC using one of the following methods:
(i)
(ii)
The provision and receipt of nonscheduled emergency medical services that are prohibited by this part are authorized.
Any action that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to take pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, the Presidential Memorandum of May 15, 2015: Delegation of Functions Under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, or the Presidential Memorandum of May 31, 2013: Delegation of Functions Under Subsection 804(h)(2)(A) of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act may be taken by the Director of the OFAC or by any other person to whom the Secretary of the Treasury has delegated authority so to act.
Office of the Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense (DoD).
Final rule.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense is finalizing the rule to exempt from the Privacy Act some records maintained in the DoD Defense Manpower Data Center system of records titled “Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES) Records,” A system of records notice for this system has been published in the
This final rule is effective June 16, 2021.
Ms. Luz D. Ortiz, Chief, Records, Privacy and Declassification Division (RPDD), 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20311-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0478.
On August 21, 2018, the Department of Defense published a proposed rule titled “Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation,” which proposed to exempt some records maintained in DMDC 18 DoD, “Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES) Records” (83 FR 42234-42235) from subsection (d) of the Privacy Act. The public comment period ended on September 20, 2018. At the end of the public comment period, DoD did not receive any pertinent public comments.
DoD now has a single DoD-level Privacy Program rule at 32 CFR part 310 (84 FR 14728-14811) that contains all the codified information required for the Department. That revised Privacy Program rule also includes all DoD component exemption rules. The OSD/JS Privacy Program regulation at 32 CFR part 311, last updated on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 56114), was no longer required and was removed from the CFR on August 7, 2019 (84 FR 38552). A system of records notice for this system was published in the
This modification to 32 CFR part 310 adds a new Privacy Act exemption rule for the Synchronized Redeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES), which is used at installations to manage, track, account for, monitor, and report on contracts, companies, and contractor employees supporting contingency operations, humanitarian assistance operations, peace operations, disaster relief operations, military exercises, events, and other activities that require contractor support. Contract scope, installations, and/or activities requiring contractor support as documented in SPOT-ES may be classified under Executive Order (E.O.) 13526, “Classified National Security Information.” Information classified under E.O. 13526, as implemented by DoD Manual (DoDM) 5200.01 Volumes 1 and 3, and DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5200.01, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). Granting unfettered access to information that is properly classified pursuant to those authorities
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. It has been determined that this rule is not a significant regulatory action under these Executive Orders.
The Congressional Review Act, title 5, U.S.C. 801
This final rule is not subject to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1532) because it does not contain a federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100M or more in any one year.
It has been certified that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within DoD. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required.
It has been determined that this rule does not impose additional information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has Federalism implications. This final rule will not have a substantial effect on State and local governments.
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is amended as follows:
5 U.S.C. 552a.
(c) * * *
(28)
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of trifludimoxazin in or on multiple commodities which are identified and discussed later in this document. BASF corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
This regulation is effective May 17, 2021. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before July 16, 2021 and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0762, is available at
Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit
Marietta Echeverria, Acting Director, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address:
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code 112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Publishing Office's e-CFR site at
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0762 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before July 16, 2021. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0762, by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at
In the
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .”
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for trifludimoxazin including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with trifludimoxazin follows.
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.
The available database of guideline studies for trifludimoxazin indicates that the primary target organs are the thyroid and liver. Trifludimoxazin is a protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)-inhibitor. PPO is a key enzyme in chlorophyll and cytochrome pigments, as well as in heme. Although hematological effects associated with this class were observed, they are not considered adverse at the selected lowest-observable adverse-effects levels (LOAELs). Effects on the thyroid occurred in rats and consisted primarily of follicular cell hypertrophy/hyperplasia and altered colloid of the thyroid after subchronic and chronic exposure durations. Increased relative thyroid weights were also observed in male rats; however, thyroid hormones were not adversely affected after subchronic exposure for males and females. Liver effects (increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP), organ weight, and histopathology) were also observed at the same dose as thyroid effects in male rats after subchronic exposure. In mice, increased liver weight, increased γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT), and hypertrophy were observed after subchronic exposures. Increased liver
Trifludimoxazin did not demonstrate neurotoxic potential in either acute or subchronic neurotoxicity studies in rats. Observations suggestive of neurotoxicity were seen in the 90-day subchronic study in dogs (
There were no adverse maternal or developmental effects observed in the rat developmental toxicity study at the limit dose. However, in the rabbit developmental study, decreased fetal body weight was observed at a lower dose than maternal toxicity (increased incidence of late abortions); thus, increased quantitative susceptibility was observed. The Extended One-Generation Reproductive Toxicity Study (EOGRTS) in rats demonstrated no increase in susceptibility as no effects were observed in the offspring while increased incidence and severity of follicular cell hypertrophy/hyperplasia and altered colloid in the thyroid was observed in the parental animals.
Immunotoxicity was not observed throughout the toxicity database. Additionally, there were no effects in the dermal toxicity study, including any effects to the thyroid.
The Agency has classified trifludimoxazin as “suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential” based on thyroid tumors, driven by adenomas, observed in male rats at 750 ppm (33 mg/kg/day); an absence of treatment-related tumors in female rats and in male and female mice, and a lack of concern for mutagenicity. The Agency has concluded that quantification of cancer risk using a non-linear approach (
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by trifludimoxazin as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe exposure level—generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for trifludimoxazin used for human risk assessment can be found in the Trifludimoxazin Human Health Risk Assessment.
1.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
2.
Using the Pesticides in Water Calculator (PWC), Pesticide Root Zone Model and the Varying Volume Water Model (PRZM/VVWM), EPA calculated the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of trifludimoxazin for acute and chronic exposures in surface and ground water. EPA used the modeled EDWCs directly in dietary exposure model to account for the contribution of trifludimoxazin residues in drinking water as follows: 5.0 ppb was used in acute dietary assessment and 3.6 ppb was used in chronic dietary risk assessment.
3.
Trifludimoxazin is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.
4.
The Agency has not found trifludimoxazin to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and trifludimoxazin does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that trifludimoxazin does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at
1.
2.
3.
i. The toxicity database for trifludimoxazin is complete.
ii. Although there was evidence for neurotoxicity in the 90-day subchronic dog study, the degree of concern for the toxicity is low because this study is used as the basis for the risk assessment PODs and is protective of any potential neurotoxicity.
iii. Clear NOAELs were identified for the developmental/offspring effects observed in the rat and rabbit prenatal developmental studies, and endpoints selected for risk assessment are protective of these effects and the quantitative susceptibility observed in the rabbit developmental study and rat EOGRTS.
iv. There is no concern due to any residual uncertainties in the exposure database. No data gaps were identified, and exposure estimates are based upon conservative default assumptions. Tolerance-level residues and 100PCT are used in dietary exposure assessments, and residential exposures are not anticipated from the proposed use pattern. As such, residual uncertainty is negligible and does not impact considerations for the FQPA Safety Factor. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to trifludimoxazin in drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by trifludimoxazin.
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1.
2.
3.
A short-term and intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, trifludimoxazin is not registered for any use patterns that would result in short-term or intermediate-term residential exposure. Short-term and intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short-term or intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no short-term or intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no further assessment of short-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short-term and intermediate-term risk for trifludimoxazin.
4.
5.
Adequate enforcement methodology (High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with tandem Mass Spectroscopy (HPLC-MS/MS) method (Method D147/02 in plant matrices)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
Trifludimoxazin is a new active ingredient, and no maximum residue limits (MRLs) have yet been established by Codex.
One commenter expressed concern about the release of pesticide chemicals to the environment. The FFDCA does not authorize EPA to consider risks to the environment, per se; rather, the FFDCA authorizes EPA to establish tolerances that permit certain levels of pesticide residues in or on food when the Agency can determine that such tolerances are safe. Taking into consideration the factors required in the FFDCA, EPA has made that safety determination for the tolerances subject to this action; the commenter provided no information relevant to that conclusion.
Based upon review of submitted data, the Agency is establishing tolerances that vary from what the petitioner requested. The petitioner had requested to establish tolerance on the entire cereal crop groups 15 and 16; however, the Agency has determined that the petitioned tolerance for cereal crop groups 15 and 16 must be revised to exclude rice commodities. While there are no data gaps for human health, the Agency has insufficient environmental fate data to support a tolerance on rice; therefore, the request to allow use on rice on the trifludimoxazin label will not be granted at this time. Because the product will not be used on rice, tolerances are not needed for residues in or on rice. Consequently, EPA is excluding rice from the tolerances being set on cereal crop groups 15 and 16.
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of trifludimoxazin in or on almond, hulls; fruit, citrus, group 10-10; fruit, pome, group 11-10; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 (except rice); grain, cereal, group 15 (except rice); nut, tree, group 14-12; peanut; peanut, hay; vegetable, foliage of legume, group 07 and vegetable, legume, group 06.
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled “Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs” (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501
This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR chapter I as follows:
21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
(a)
(b)-(d) [Reserved]
Federal Communications Commission.
Final action.
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) acts on several proposals that will impact FY 2021 regulatory fees.
This final action is effective June 16, 2021.
This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order, FCC 21-49, MD Docket No. 21-190, and MD Docket No. 20-105, adopted on May 3, 2021 and released on May 4, 2021. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554, or by downloading the text from the Commission's website at
Roland Helvajian, Office of Managing Director at (202) 418-0444.
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) relating to this Report and Order. The FRFA is located towards the end of this document.
2. This document does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
3. The Commission has determined, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, concurs that these rules are non-major under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission will send a copy of this Report & Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
1. In this Report and Order, we adopt a new distinction between non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite systems, as further described below, by creating two new fee subcategories, one for “less complex” NGSO systems and a second for all other NGSO systems identified as “other” NGSO systems, both under the broader category of “Space Stations (Non-Geostationary Orbit)”.
2. We first address the recent modifications in methodology for International Bureau licensee fees to more closely reflect the statutory requirement. After previously increasing the allocation of indirect full time equivalents (FTEs) in the International Bureau, in FY 2020 the Commission adopted a regulatory fee for foreign licensed space stations with U.S. market access, recharacterizing and thereby increasing the total number of direct FTEs for the International Bureau to 28. The Commission also adjusted the FTE allocation for the international bearer circuit (IBC) category to eight FTEs, from 6.9 FTEs, to better reflect the direct FTE work in the International Bureau for that fee category, resulting in 20 FTEs assigned to the satellite and earth station regulatory fee category. The Commission also adjusted the allocation of FTEs among geostationary orbit (GSO) and NGSO space station and earth station operators. The Commission noted the disparity in number of units between GSO space stations (98) and NGSO space stations (seven), and noted that under a single NGSO license, many satellites can be operated while counting as a single unit for regulatory fee purposes, but only one satellite can be operated per GSO space station regulatory fee unit. To ensure that regulatory fees more closely reflect the work of processing applications and rulemaking for each category, the Commission allocated 80% of space station regulatory fees to GSOs and 20%
3. In the further notice of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) (85 FR 71593, Nov. 10, 2020) accompanying the FY 2020 Report and Order (85 FR 59864, Sept. 23, 2020), the Commission sought comment on different proposals for new fee categories for different types of NGSO systems. In response to the FNPRM, some commenters generally argue that the size of an NGSO system, or the services the system may provide, does not correlate to Commission resources. Others support adopting various aspects of the FNPRM proposals, and that NGSO systems should be distinguished by type. For purposes of calculating regulatory fees, we determine that the number of U.S.-authorized earth stations with which an NGSO system will communicate and the primary use of the NGSO system are complementary considerations that together define the complexity of the system. After consideration of the record, we conclude that the majority of our NGSO-related regulatory activities involve certain types of NGSO systems, and that the NGSO category can be divided into two types of systems for purposes of the assessment of regulatory fees: (1) “less complex” systems, defined as NGSO satellite systems planning to communicate with 20 or fewer U.S. authorized earth stations that are primarily used for Earth Exploration Satellite Service (EESS) and/or Automatic Identification System (AIS); and (2) “other” NGSO satellite systems. We therefore adopt two subcategories under the Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit) fee category: (1) Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit)—Less Complex; and (2) Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit)—Other, as discussed below.
4. In the FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on several specific proposals to define multiple NGSO system fee categories. Among these was a proposal from Amazon Web Services, Inc. (AWS) to adopt a nominal regulatory fees for NGSO systems with five or fewer U.S.-licensed earth stations for Telemetry, Tracking, and Control (TT&C) and non-domestic data and downlink purposes. As discussed below, we adopt a variation on this proposal. The Commission also sought comment on a proposal from Kineis to use a formula to calculate fee tiers for an NGSO system based on the number of operating satellites and the total transmit bandwidth. Kineis had argued that its proposal would allow for fair allocation of fees in consideration of the varying facets of each NGSO system, such as size, number of space stations, necessary spectrum, and services provided. In comments to the FNPRM, Kepler Communications Inc. (Kepler) recommends a variation on Kineis's approach, proposing fee tiers based on quantity of desired bandwidth, the “value” of the desired spectral band, and aggregate on-orbit mass. Additionally, the Commission sought comment on a proposal from Eutelsat S.A. (Eutelsat) to create two regulatory fee categories for NGSO systems based on the number of satellites, as well as a proposal of Myriota Pty. Ltd. (Myriota) to assign each NGSO system into one of three fee categories: Fixed-satellite service (FSS), mobile satellite service (MSS) and remote sensing (EESS), and other NGSO systems.
5. In connection with these various proposals, a number of commenters agree that the Commission expends more resources on certain types of NGSO systems. Commenters focus on various characteristics of the NGSO systems. AWS, for example, suggests that EESS systems that communicate with five or fewer U.S.-licensed earth stations for TT&C and non-domestic data downlink purposes do not meaningfully gain access to the United States market. AWS explains that instead, the U.S.-located earth stations function as a data transit location, and actual service occurs in the cloud where the data is processed. Planet Labs Inc. (Planet) supports Myriota's proposal to distinguish between systems based solely on the type of service offered. Planet asserts that the Commission expended greater resources in 2020 on FSS-related report and orders, proceedings, rulemakings, and processing adjudications than it did for other services.
6. Not all commenters take this view, however. For example, Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) disagrees with Myriota's proposal and contends that the record contains no evidence that the service provided by an NGSO system correlates with the expenditure of Commission resources. SpaceX offers that many EESS systems require Commission staff to coordinate with government systems through the Interdepartmental Radio Advisory Committee process, while many FSS systems do not, and that the Commission has recently conducted rulemakings affecting various types of satellite systems beyond FSS systems. Planet counters that, although processing EESS applications can also be time consuming, the vast majority of the processing burden is borne by the applicant.
7. After reviewing and evaluating the regulatory tasks for all NGSO systems, we agree with commenters asserting that we should differentiate within the NGSO space station category for regulatory fees. The amount of work involved in regulating NGSO systems and the number of reasonably related benefits provided to the payors of the NGSO fee category by our activities appear to directly correlate with certain characteristics in a requested authorization for an NGSO system. Both the number of earth stations and the primary use of the system are relevant. Accordingly, we adopt a regulatory fee category for “less complex” NGSO systems and define this “less complex” NGSO system category by adopting elements of several of the FNPRM proposals. For regulatory fee purposes, we define a “less complex” systems as NGSO satellite systems that plan to communicate with 20 or fewer U.S. authorized earth stations, primarily used for EESS and/or AIS. Any NGSO satellite systems that do not qualify as “less complex” would fall into the category of “other” NGSO satellite systems, for regulatory fee purposes.
8. Our experience demonstrates that the systems providing EESS and or AIS are most likely to be “less complex” systems if they also are planning to communicate with 20 or fewer earth stations. These “less complex” systems require fewer Commission resources because, for example, they are nearly always granted pursuant to waivers of resource-intensive processing rounds, based on their ability to share with other operators in the requested frequency bands. We agree with Planet's assertion that those systems authorized through a processing round typically do involve considerable time and effort adjudicating contentious processing round disputes and related licensing matters. In addition, the Commission has expended significant resources on rulemakings and licensing proceedings for “more complex” NGSO systems. These rulemakings and licensing proceedings have focused on issues that correlate to systems planning to communicate with a large number of earth stations. As Planet notes in its comments, the Commission historically has devoted significant resources to NGSO FSS-related rulemaking matters. The Commission has also expended considerable resources evaluating spectrum sharing issues between NGSO FSS and terrestrial services, which increase in complexity as the number of earth stations increase. Moreover, systems planning to communicate with larger numbers of earth stations typically have a large global presence. These global systems are likely to
9. We also find the Commission's regulatory work and related benefits provided to the payor of this fee category appear to have a direct correlation with the number of U.S.-authorized earth stations with which an NGSO system will communicate. As AWS points out, the complexity of that system relates generally with the amount of regulatory resources expended in connection with this type of system. Specifically, we find that those systems planning to use 20 or fewer earth stations have generally limited scope of authorization and require significantly less Commission oversight than the regulatory work involved with other NGSO systems. Our internal analysis also shows that regulation of NGSO systems planning to communicate with 20 or fewer U.S.-authorized earth stations tends to be noticeably less complex compared to the regulation of NGSO systems planning to communicate with more than 20 earth stations. Although 20 earth stations are greater in number than AWS's proposed five earth stations, we think that it would be a more accurate number as a proxy to reflect the complexity of space systems based on our analysis.
10. We use the phrase “planning to communicate” since some more complex NGSO systems may communicate with a small number of earth stations during initial operational phases, but actually intend to communicate with a significantly larger set of earth stations. We find this initial phase to not be reflective of Commission costs, and therefore we will look to longer-term system design in order to determine complexity. We will interpret “planning to communicate” based on the system design provided at the NGSO space station application stage. For regulatory fee purposes, the term “earth station” encompasses all stations, including satellite gateways and user terminals. Transmitters, such as AIS, do not fall within the definition of “earth station” under part 25 of the Commission's rules since satellite reception is not intended, but rather is an incidental monitoring of a signal primarily intended for reception by terrestrial stations.
11. We are persuaded by AWS to include TT&C earth stations used for spacecraft control in this earth station count. In addition, the total number of earth stations include all earth stations planning to communicate with the relevant system—whether the earth station is operated by the system operator or a third party is irrelevant for regulatory fee purposes.
12. As discussed above, we expect less complex NGSO space systems operations would involve primarily EESS and/or AIS. NGSO systems that plan to communicate with 20 or fewer U.S.-authorized stations often are developed for collecting earth exploration data and utilize communications primarily for the purpose of transferring data collected in space back to the ground. Such operations do not include objectively complex services like industrial Internet of Things services and other data services which involve space stations that typically communicate with hundreds or thousands of user terminals, and impose larger regulatory review burdens. Although we expect less complex NGSO space systems would be used primarily for EESS and/or AIS, we decline to explicitly limit “less complex” system eligibility to a particular service class alone, as proposed by Myriota, because some “less complex” systems may use multiple types of services, and the number of earth stations with which a system plans to communicate is a reasonable proxy for identifying complexity of NGSO space stations systems, and our regulatory costs. We note that EESS services typically are authorized to communicate with 20 or fewer U.S.-authorized earth stations. With respect to AIS, as a shipboard broadcast system that transmits a marine vessel's identification and position to aid in navigation and maritime safety, we also found that these systems receiving AIS signals and planning to operate with 20 or fewer earth stations involve less Commission oversight compared to other NGSO systems. We do not, however, foreclose the possibility of designating other categories of NGSO systems as “less complex” systems in the future if our experience supports a finding that our regulatory work for such systems is significantly less than those for other NGSO systems.
13. We assess the “less complex” regulatory fee on a per NGSO space station system basis, rather than on a per-earth station basis as proposed by AWS. Additionally, although AWS proposes that we assess only a nominal fee for NGSO systems with a small number of earth stations, we find that NGSO systems communicating with even a small number of earth stations do still benefit from the Commission's regulation, including enforcement, rulemakings, and international activities, and require Commission resources, therefore justifying a substantive, rather than nominal, fee. As AWS notes, most NGSO systems plan to utilize earth stations globally to remain competitive, and, for these NGSOs, downlinking to the United States is done as a function of needing a robust earth station network for its operations. Regardless of whether a space system communicates with one or thousands of earth stations, the Commission still expends significant time and resources in regulating these space systems, and those considerations will be calculated accordingly into the “less complex,” yet substantive, fee. We also find that among the new less complex category of space systems, there are not significant differences with respect to our regulatory activities benefiting each space system. We further decline to assess fees for an NGSO space station system on a “per earth station” basis. We note that the number of earth stations does not drive the regulatory resources expended for regulating space stations per se; rather, the number of earth stations typically correlates to the complexity of an NGSO space station. As noted elsewhere, we use the number of earth stations as a proxy to determine complexity of a space system. Our experience shows that there is not a meaningful resource difference, for example, between regulation of a system planning to communicate with four U.S. earth stations versus a system planning to communicate with 17 U.S. earth stations. The clear differentiation, at this point, appears to be between those NGSO systems planning to communicate with roughly 20 or fewer earth stations authorized by the United States and other NGSO systems, the vast majority of which plan to communicate with more than 100 earth stations authorized by the United States, which may include user terminals or otherwise ubiquitously deployed earth stations. In our experience, there are not “close cases” between these two categories of systems. Accordingly, we adopt this fee on a per NGSO space station system basis given the regulatory cost and
14. We disagree with those commenters advocating against adopting additional categories of NGSO fees. The Commission collects regulatory fees based on the Commission's efforts spent on regulating a payor and taking into account the benefits provided to the payor by the Commission's activities. Telesat and SES suggest that, if a system operator believes that in a particular case the standard NGSO fee is substantially disproportionate, it can seek a fee waiver or reduction. While our rules do enable waiver requests, they are exceptional in nature, and we decline to set up a process based on an expectation of a fee waiver or reduction. As described above, we see a clear dividing point between systems that are more complex to regulate and systems that require far fewer resources to regulate, and find that this dividing line is fairer and easier to administer than a fee waiver or other process. We also disagree with Eutelsat and OneWeb that we need additional development of the record before creating a new NGSO fee category. We sought further comment in the FNPRM to develop the record on this issue and using a combination of factors explored in the record, conclude that certain NGSO systems should pay a different fee based on the resources required to regulate such systems. If circumstances warrant, the Commission may choose revisit or revise this new category in the future.
15. We also disagree, at this time, with the formula-based systems proposed by Kineis and Kepler, since these proposals are overly complex and would require the additional expenditure of Commission resources to calculate and assign fees for each individual system. Moreover, we do not find that all aspects proposed to be factored into these formulas correlate with the resources the Commission expends in regulating each system. In our experience, number of satellites, total bandwidth, on-orbit mass, and market share of the service type are not consistently indicative of the complexity of NGSO regulation. We also decline to adopt Eutelsat's proposal to create two regulatory fee categories for NGSO systems based on the number of satellites. It is not our experience that number of satellites (or satellite mass) is the key driver of system complexity and regulation. For example, an NGSO system with a small number of satellites, authorized as part of a processing round to operate in the FSS to provide broadband to user terminals in a particular area, will receive significant continuous benefits reasonably related to our regulatory work. Instead, we find that the number of earth stations authorized by the United States with which a system plans to communicate provides a clearer proxy for identifying system complexity upon which to allocate fees. This approach ensures that our fee apportionment is reasonably related to our regulatory cost and that the fee structure is easier to administer.
16. In summary, after reviewing the record and analyzing the resources the International Bureau devotes to NGSO oversight and regulation, we adopt an additional NGSO space station category for “less complex” NGSO systems, for regulatory fees. In addition, we create a fee category for “other” NGSO systems that do not qualify as “less complex” systems. We place these two categories: (1) Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit)—Less Complex; and (2) Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit)—Other under the current Space Station (Non-Geostationary Orbit) fee category.
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was included in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) accompanying the regulatory fee Report and Order for fiscal year 2020. The Commission sought written public comment on these proposals including comment on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the IRFA.
2. In the Report and Order, the Commission adopts a modified version of a proposal to the FNPRM on creating a new regulatory fee category for “less complex” non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite systems. The Commission defines “less complex” NGSO satellite systems as those NGSO systems that plan to communicate with 20 or fewer earth stations in the United States primarily used for Earth Exploration Satellite Service (EESS) and/or Automatic Identification System (AIS).
3. Under section 9 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Communications Act or Act), regulatory fees are mandated by Congress and collected to recover the regulatory costs associated with the Commission's enforcement, policy and rulemaking, user information, and international activities in an amount that can be reasonably expected to equal the amount of the Commission's annual appropriation. The objective in the Report and Order for adopting the new regulatory fee category is to have a new category (and lower fee) for the smaller NGSO systems instead of grouping them with the larger NGSO systems.
4. None.
5. No comments were filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
6. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules and policies, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A “small business concern” is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA. Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.9 million small businesses, according to the SBA.
7. Other Toll Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition for small businesses specifically applicable to Other Toll Carriers. This category includes toll carriers that do not fall within the categories of interexchange carriers, operator service providers, prepaid calling card providers, satellite service carriers, or toll resellers. The closest applicable NAICS code category is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 shows that there were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, most Other Toll Carriers can be considered small. According to internally developed Commission data, 284 companies reported that their
8. All Other Telecommunications. “All Other Telecommunications” is defined as follows: This U.S. industry is comprised of establishments that are primarily engaged in providing specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Establishments providing internet services or voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications connections are also included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for “All Other Telecommunications,” which consists of all such firms with gross annual receipts of $35 million or less. For this category, census data for 2012 show that there were 1,442 firms that operated for the entire year. Of these firms, a total of 1,400 had gross annual receipts of less than $25 million. Thus, most “All Other Telecommunications” firms potentially affected by the rules adopted can be considered small.
9. This Report and Order does not adopt any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements.
10. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its approach, which may include the following four alternatives, among others: (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
11. In the FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on whether it should adopt a new fee category for certain types of NGSO systems, and in the Report and Order the Commission adopted a new category for a type of smaller “less complex” NGSO system that would have a lower regulatory fee than the other NGSO systems. The Commission reviewed and evaluated the regulatory work done for all NGSO systems and found that those systems planning to use 20 or fewer earth stations have generally limited scope of authorization,
12. In keeping with the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have considered certain alternative means of mitigating the effects of fee increases. This new fee category adopted for “less complex” NGSO systems will have a lower regulatory fee than that for the other NGSO systems, because these systems are much smaller than traditional NGSO systems.
13. Accordingly,
14.
15.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of low halon concentration in the forward and aft cargo compartments due to air leakage through cargo door seals, and the certification of improved cargo door seals. This proposed AD would require replacing the forward, aft, and bulk cargo compartment door seals with new seals; and installing a placard on the forward, aft, and cargo compartment doors; and for certain airplanes, implementing an operational limitation for certain routes, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 1, 2021.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223; email
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223; email
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0049, dated February 18, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0049) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122; A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N; A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N; and A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -252N,
This proposed AD was prompted by reports of low halon concentration in the forward and aft cargo compartments due to air leakage through cargo door seals, and the certification of improved cargo door seals. The FAA is proposing this AD to address low halon concentration, which could affect the fire extinguishing system efficiency in the cargo compartments and possibly result in failure of the system to contain a cargo compartment fire. See the MCAI for additional background information.
This NPRM would not supersede AD 2020-16-01, Amendment 39-21185 (85 FR 47013, August 4, 2020) (AD 2020-16-01). Rather, the FAA has determined that a stand-alone AD would be more appropriate to address the changes in the MCAI. This NPRM would require replacing the forward, aft, and bulk cargo compartment door seals with new seals; and installing a placard on the forward, aft, and bulk cargo compartment doors; and for certain airplanes, implementing an operational limitation for certain routes. Accomplishment of the proposed actions would then terminate all requirements of AD 2020-16-01 for forward and aft cargo door seals having part number (p/n) D5237106020000, D5237106020200, D5237106020400, D5237300120000, or D5237300120200; and bulk cargo door seals having p/n D5237200220000 or D5237200220200 only. AD 2020-16-01 also addresses paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA AD 2021-0049, and forward and aft cargo door seals p/n D5237106020400S, approved under parts manufacturer approval (PMA) PQ1715CE. This AD does not address p/n D5237106020400S, approved under PMA PQ1715CE. The FAA is considering additional rulemaking to require replacement of p/n D5237106020400S, approved under PMA PQ1715CE.
EASA AD 2021-0049 describes procedures for replacing the forward, aft, and bulk cargo compartment door seals with new seals; and installing a placard on the forward, aft, and bulk cargo compartment door. For certain airplanes, EASA AD 2021-0049 describes procedures for implementing an operational limitation prohibiting flying the airplane over a route having a diversion time of more than 60 minutes. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD 2021-0049 described previously, as incorporated by reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.
EASA AD 2021-0049 specifies amending the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) and “operating that aeroplane accordingly.” However this AD would not include a requirement for “operating that aeroplane accordingly” as that action is already required by existing FAA operating regulations. FAA regulations require pilots to follow the procedures in the existing AFM including all updates. 14 CFR 91.9 requires that any person operating a civil aircraft must comply with the operating limitations specified in the AFM. Therefore, including a requirement in this AD to operate the airplane according to the revised AFM would be redundant and unnecessary. Further, compliance with such a requirement in an AD would be impracticable to demonstrate or track on an ongoing basis; therefore, a requirement to operate the airplane in such a manner would be unenforceable.
In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2021-0049 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2021-0049 in its entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to “all required actions and compliance times,” compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section titled “Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)” in the EASA AD. Service information specified in EASA AD 2021-0049 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2021-0049 will be available on the internet at
The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,728 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) by July 1, 2021.
This AD affects AD 2020-16-01, Amendment 39-21185 (85 FR 47013, August 4, 2020) (AD 2020-16-01).
This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any category.
(1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
(2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes.
(3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes.
(4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, and -272NX airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26, Fire protection; 52, Doors.
This AD was prompted by reports of low halon concentration in the forward and aft cargo compartments due to air leakage through cargo door seals, and the certification of improved cargo door seals. The FAA is issuing this AD to address low halon concentration, which could affect the fire extinguishing system efficiency in the cargo compartments and possibly result in failure of the system to contain a cargo compartment fire.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0049, dated February 18, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0049).
(1) Where EASA AD 2021-0049 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA AD 2021-0049 do not apply to this AD; FAA AD 2020-16-01 addresses those requirements.
(3) Where paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2021-0049 specifies amending the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) and “operating that aeroplane accordingly,” this AD does not include a requirement for “operating that aeroplane accordingly” as that action is already required by existing FAA operating regulations.
(4) Paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2021-0049 specifies amending “the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) of the aeroplane by inserting a copy of this AD,” however, this AD requires amending “the existing AFM and applicable corresponding operational procedures.”
(5) The “Remarks” section of EASA AD EASA AD 2021-0049 does not apply to this AD.
(6) The provisions specified in paragraphs (5) and (6) of EASA AD 2021-0049 do not apply to this AD.
Accomplishing the actions required by this AD for the affected parts defined in EASA AD 2021-0049 terminates all requirements of AD 2020-16-01 for forward and aft cargo door seals having part number (p/n) D5237106020000, D5237106020200, D5237106020400, D5237300120000, or D5237300120200; and bulk cargo door seals having p/n D5237200220000 or D5237200220200 only.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1) For information about EASA AD 2021-0049, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223; email
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Intent to issue order.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) intends to issue an order that would adjust for inflation dollar amount thresholds in the rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that permits investment advisers to charge performance-based fees to “qualified clients.” Under that rule, an investment adviser may charge performance-based fees if a “qualified client” has a certain minimum net worth or minimum dollar amount of assets under the management of the adviser. The Commission's order would increase, to reflect inflation, the minimum net worth that a “qualified client” must have under the rule. The order would also increase, to reflect inflation, the minimum dollar amount of assets under management.
Matthew Cook, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6787 or
The Commission intends to issue an order under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act” or “Act”).
Section 205(a)(1) of the Advisers Act generally prohibits an investment adviser from entering into, extending, renewing, or performing any investment advisory contract that provides for compensation to the adviser based on a share of capital gains on, or capital appreciation of, the funds of a client.
The Commission adopted rule 205-3 in 1985 to exempt an investment adviser from the prohibition against charging a client performance fees in certain circumstances.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”)
The May 2011 Release also proposed amendments to rule 205-3 providing, among other things, that the Commission would issue an order every five years in the future adjusting the rule's dollar amount thresholds for inflation.
On June 14, 2016, the Commission issued an order adjusting for inflation, as appropriate, the dollar amount thresholds of the assets-under-management test and the net worth test.
Pursuant to section 418 of the Dodd-Frank Act and rule 205-3(e), today we are providing notice
We anticipate that, if we issue the order described above, the effective date will be 60 days following the order
By the Commission.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Nebraska on July 16, 2020. This proposed action will amend the SIP to revise title 129 of the Nebraska Administrative Code by removing a portion of the SIP that addresses general conformity. General Conformity ensures that the actions taken by federal agencies do not interfere with a state's plan to attain and maintain national standards for air quality. Since states are no longer required to include general conformity requirements in SIPs, these proposed revisions remove unnecessary language and do not substantively change any existing statutory or regulatory requirement. The proposed revisions do not impact the stringency of the SIP or air quality nor do they impact the State's ability to attain or maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The EPA's proposed approval of this rule revision is in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Comments must be received on or before June 16, 2021.
You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2021-0298 to
Allie Donohue, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-7986; email address:
Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to the EPA.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2021-0298, at
The EPA is proposing to amend Nebraska's SIP to include revisions to title 129 of the Nebraska Administrative Code. The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Nebraska SIP submitted by the State of Nebraska on July 16, 2020. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to amend the Nebraska SIP by removing a portion of the SIP as follows: Title 129, Chapter 40. General Conformity. EPA is proposing approval of these revisions as they remove unnecessary language and do not substantively change any existing statutory or regulatory requirement.
The EPA approved this rule into the Nebraska SIP in 1972. In August 2005, Congress passed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) which eliminated the requirement for states to adopt and submit General Conformity SIPs. Section 6011 of SAFETEA-LU revised the conformity requirements in section 176(c)of the CAA. Specifically, section 6011(f) revised section 176(c)(4)(A) of the CAA by deleting the requirement for the states to adopt and submit General Conformity SIPs.
In 2010, EPA revised the General Conformity regulations to make the adoption and submittal of the General Conformity SIP optional for state and eligible federally-recognized tribal governments. See 75 FR 17253 (April 5, 2010). Since there is no longer a requirement for SIPs to include general conformity requirements, EPA finds that the proposed revisions will not impact the stringency of the SIP or air quality.
States are no longer required to have their own general conformity rules. If a state does not have a conformity SIP, then federal agencies will conduct an evaluation under the requirements of 40 CFR 93.150-93.165. The SIP revision being proposed for approval by this action removes unnecessary language from the SIP and does not have an adverse effect on air quality in Nebraska.
The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
The EPA is proposing to amend the Nebraska SIP by approving the state's request to remove Title 129 section 40. General Conformity. The removal of this portion of the SIP will remove unnecessary language and does not substantively change any existing statutory or regulatory requirement. The EPA has determined that these changes will not impact the stringency of the SIP or adversely impact air quality.
The EPA is processing this as a proposed action because we are soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments.
In this document, the EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. As described in the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Nebraska Regulations from the Nebraska State Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not involve technical standards; and
• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
42 U.S.C. 7401
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Notice; 30-day extension for public comments.
The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is providing an additional 30 days for public comments on the Notice on Supply Chains for the Production of Agricultural Commodities and Food Products published on April 21, 2021. During the first two weeks of the comment period, AMS received requests from stakeholders and organizations for additional time to provide thoughtful and thorough feedback to this request. Requests were received from representatives of critical supply chain activities whose comments would be of great value to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in preparing the report required by the Executive Order on “America's Supply Chains.”
Comments on the notice published April 21, 2021, must be received by June 21, 2021.
All written comments in response to this notice should be posted online at
Dr. Melissa R. Bailey, Agricultural Marketing Service, at (202) 205-9356; or by email at
On February 24, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14017, “America's Supply Chains” (86 FR 11849) (E.O. 14017). E.O. 14017 focuses on the need for resilient, diverse, and secure supply chains to ensure U.S. economic prosperity and national security. Such supply chains are needed to address conditions that can reduce critical manufacturing capacity and the availability and integrity of critical goods, products, and services. In relevant part, E.O. 14017 directs that, within one year, the Secretary shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA) and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy (APEP), on the supply chains for the production of agricultural commodities and food products. This notice requests comments and information from the public to assist USDA in preparing the report required by E.O. 14017. Further, USDA will use public comments received through this notice to inform our thinking regarding how available authorities and funding related to food supply chain resilience can help to increase durability and resilience within the U.S. food supply. We are particularly interested in comments addressing local and regional food systems, creating new market opportunities (including for value-added agriculture and value-added products), facilitating fair and competitive markets (including traceability and supply chain transparency), advancing efforts to transform the food system, meeting the needs of the agricultural workforce, supporting and promoting consumers' nutrition security, particularly for low-income populations, and supporting the needs of socially disadvantaged and small to mid-sized producers and processors.
This document notifies the public that AMS is extending the comment period on the Notice on Supply Chains for the Production of Agricultural Commodities and Food Products, 86 FR 20652 (Apr. 21, 2021) from May 21, 2021 to June 21, 2021. Comments previously submitted during the initial 30-day comment period [April 21, 2021-May 21, 2021] need not be resubmitted, as these comments are already incorporated into the public record.
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Forest Service is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on the renewal of a currently approved information collection,
Comments must be received in writing on or before July 16, 2021 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.
Comments concerning this notice should be addressed to David Haston, Branch Chief, Equipment and Chemicals, US Forest Service, National Interagency Fire Center, 3833 S Development Avenue, Boise, Idaho 83705.
Comments also may be submitted via facsimile to 208-387-5398 or by email to:
The public may inspect the draft supporting statement and/or comments received at the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), Jack Wilson Building, in Boise, Idaho during normal business hours. Visitors are encouraged to call ahead to 208-387-5512 to facilitate entry to the building. The public may request an electronic copy of the draft supporting statement and/or any comments received be sent via return email. Requests should be emailed to
Shirley Zylstra, National Technology and Development Program, (NTDP) at (406) 329-4859 or David Haston, National InterAgency Fire Center at (208) 387-5642. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1(800) 877-8339 twenty-four hours a day, every day of the year, including holidays.
To initiate an evaluation, product manufacturers (or authorized suppliers) enter into an agreement with the Forest Service and pay all costs associated with the submission and evaluation of the product. Once the agreement is in place and funds are deposited to cover the associated costs, the manufacturer submits the following information to WFCS:
1. List of the specific ingredients and quantity used to prepare the product;
2. Identification of a specific company as the source of supply for each ingredient;
3. Copies of the Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for the product and for each ingredient used to prepare the product (from the company that supplies that chemical); and
4. Specific mixing requirements and performance information.
Review of the submitted information assures that the product does not contain ingredients meeting the criteria for Chemicals of Concern. Chemicals of Concern are defined as chemicals appearing on one or more of the following lists:
• Agency list of unacceptable ingredients;
• National Toxicology Program (NTP) Annual Report on Carcinogens;
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs for Potential Carcinogen;
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) List of Extremely Hazardous Substances and Their Threshold Planning Quantities;
• Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Acutely Hazardous and Toxic Wastes; and
• Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know (EPCRA), Toxic Release Inventory.
A risk assessment, performed at the manufacturer expense, is required. The risk assessment, performed by a third party selected by the Agency, assesses the products and levels of ingredients found in typical applications relative to human and environmental impact.
Each product submitted is tested to determine the mammalian and aquatic toxicity of the product and must meet specific levels of performance to minimize potential risk during firefighting operations. Additional tests are performed to determine the effectiveness of the product to reduce spread rate and intensity of the fire by application directly on or near the fire. A number of product characteristics are measured over the operational performance range of the product to ensure that the product meets the needs of the firefighters in the field.
The collection of this information for each product submission is necessary due to the length of time needed to test the product (16 to 18 months) and the need to ensure that products do not pose a hazard for laboratory personnel during the evaluation prior to purchase and use. This information collection and the product evaluation must be conducted on an ongoing basis to ensure the Agency can solicit and award contracts in a timely manner to provide firefighters with safe and effective wildland fire chemical products.
Comment is invited on: (1) Whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical or scientific utility; (2) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission request toward Office of Management and Budget approval.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via web conference on Thursday, August 12, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time. The purpose of the meeting is to review report draft.
The meeting will be held on Thursday, August 12, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. PT.
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit Office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Arkansas Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a virtual (online) meeting Friday, June 4, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. Central Time. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to discuss civil rights concerns related to IDEA compliance and implementation in Arkansas schools.
The meeting will be held on Friday, June 4, 2021 at 1 p.m. Central time.
Melissa Wojnaroski, Designated Federal Officer, at
Members of the public may join online or listen to this discussion through the above call-in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. 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 conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski at
Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Michigan Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via web-conference, for the purpose of finalizing their report on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on voting rights in the state.
The meeting will take place Monday May 17 at 9:30 a.m. Eastern time
Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at
Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll-free number or online through the above registration link. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski at
Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that the Oklahoma Advisory Committee to the Commission will hold virtual of meetings on Tuesday, May 25, 2021 from 10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. (CT). The purpose of the meeting is to review and approve the current draft advisory memorandum on racial disparities and policing in Oklahoma.
The meetings will be held on:
Brooke Peery, DFO, at
These meetings are available to the public through the Webex links above. If joining only via phone callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Individual who is 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 conference call number found through registering at the web link.
Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Brooke Peery at
Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via web conference on Wednesday, September 1, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time. The purpose of the meeting is to review report draft.
The meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 1, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time.
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit Office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via web conference on Tuesday, June 22, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Pacific Time. The purpose of the meeting is to review report outline.
The meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 22, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. PT
Ana Victoria Fortes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit Office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to Ana Victoria Fortes at
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at
Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website,
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Notice of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the South Carolina Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via-teleconference on Thursday, June 3, 2021, at 12:00 p.m. (EST) the purpose of the meeting is to for the Committee to plan its next civil rights project.
The meeting will be held on: Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time,
Barbara Delaviez at
Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organizations they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference call. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal
Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Carolyn Allen at
Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Program Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that certain chassis and subassemblies thereof (chassis) from the People's Republic of China (China) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2020, through June 30, 2020.
Applicable May 17, 2021.
Hermes Pinilla or Mary Kolberg, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3477 or (202) 482-1785, respectively.
On March 4, 2021, Commerce published its
The POI is January 1, 2020, through June 30, 2020.
The products covered by this investigation are certain chassis and subassemblies thereof from China. For a full description of the scope of this investigation,
In accordance with the preamble to Commerce's regulations,
All issues raised in the case briefs and rebuttal briefs submitted by interested parties in this proceeding are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by parties and responded to by Commerce is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is available electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at
Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, Commerce normally adjusts the dumping margin for countervailable export subsidies. In the
We continue to find that the use of facts available is warranted in determining the rate of the China-wide entity pursuant to sections 776(a)(1) and (a)(2)(A)-(C) of the Act. Further, use of adverse facts available (AFA) is warranted because the China-wide entity did not cooperate to the best of its ability to comply with our request for information and, accordingly, we applied adverse inferences in selecting from the facts available, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(a).
The China-wide entity includes mandatory respondents Dongguan CIMC Vehicle Co., Ltd. and Qingdao CIMC Special Vehicles Co., Ltd. (collectively, CIMC) and Guangdong Fuwa Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (Fuwa), as well as the companies that received, but did not complete, Commerce's quantity and value questionnaire. Because CIMC submitted its supplemental questionnaire responses in an untimely manner, necessary information regarding our separate rate inquiries is not available on the record. Further, Fuwa did not provide information on all shareholders and ultimate shareholders. Therefore, we continue to find that CIMC and Fuwa have not demonstrated eligibility for a separate rate. Because none of the companies responded to the best of their ability to Commerce's questionnaires, we assigned the highest margin alleged in the petition, 188.05 percent, to the China-wide entity.
Because no companies qualified for a separate rate, producer/exporter combination rates were not calculated.
Commerce determines that the estimated weighted-average dumping margin is as follows:
The dumping margin calculations in the
As a result of our
Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, upon the publication of this notice, Commerce will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the normal value exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1) For all combinations of Chinese producers/exporters of subject merchandise that have not established eligibility for their own separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for the China-wide entity; and (2) for all third-country exporters of subject merchandise not listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate is the cash deposit rate applicable to the Chinese producer/exporter combination (or China-wide entity) that supplied that third-country exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
To determine the cash deposit rate, Commerce normally adjusts the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the amount of domestic subsidy pass-through and export subsidies determined in a companion CVD proceeding when CVD provisional measures are in effect. Accordingly, where Commerce makes an affirmative determination for domestic subsidy pass-through or export subsidies, Commerce offsets the calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the appropriate rate(s). In this case, there was no demonstration on the record that an adjustment for domestic subsidies was warranted in the
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Commerce will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order, without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Because Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of chassis from China no later than 45 days after this final determination. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce
This notice will serve as a final reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
The merchandise covered by this investigation consists of chassis and subassemblies thereof, whether finished or unfinished, whether assembled or unassembled, whether coated or uncoated, regardless of the number of axles, for carriage of containers, or other payloads (including self-supporting payloads) for road, marine roll-on/roll-off (RORO) and/or rail transport. Chassis are typically, but are not limited to, rectangular framed trailers with a suspension and axle system, wheels and tires, brakes, a lighting and electrical system, a coupling for towing behind a truck tractor, and a locking system or systems to secure the shipping container or containers to the chassis using twistlocks, slide pins or similar attachment devices to engage the corner fittings on the container or other payload.
Subject merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the following subassemblies:
• Chassis frames, or sections of chassis frames, including kingpin assemblies, bolsters consisting of transverse beams with locking or support mechanisms, goosenecks, drop assemblies, extension mechanisms and/or rear impact guards;
• Running gear assemblies or axle assemblies for connection to the chassis frame, whether fixed in nature or capable of sliding fore and aft or lifting up and lowering down, which may or may not include suspension(s) (mechanical or pneumatic), wheel end components, slack adjusters, axles, brake chambers, locking pins, and tires and wheels;
• Landing gear assemblies, for connection to the chassis frame, capable of supporting the chassis when it is not engaged to a tractor; and
• Assemblies that connect to the chassis frame or a section of the chassis frame, such as, but not limited to, pintle hooks or B-trains (which include a fifth wheel), which are capable of connecting a chassis to a converter dolly or another chassis.
Importation of any of these subassemblies, whether assembled or unassembled, constitutes an unfinished chassis for purposes of this investigation.
Subject merchandise also includes chassis, whether finished or unfinished, entered with or for further assembly with components such as, but not limited to: hub and drum assemblies, brake assemblies (either drum or disc), axles, brake chambers, suspensions and suspension components, wheel end components, landing gear legs, spoke or disc wheels, tires, brake control systems, electrical harnesses and lighting systems.
Processing of finished and unfinished chassis and components such as trimming, cutting, grinding, notching, punching, drilling, painting, coating, staining, finishing, assembly, or any other processing either in the country of manufacture of the in-scope product or in a third country does not remove the product from the scope. Inclusion of other components not identified as comprising the finished or unfinished chassis does not remove the product from the scope.
Individual components entered and sold by themselves are not subject to the investigation, but components entered with or for further assembly with a finished or unfinished chassis are subject merchandise. A finished chassis is ultimately comprised of several different types of subassemblies. Within each subassembly there are numerous components that comprise a given subassembly.
This scope excludes dry van trailers, refrigerated van trailers and flatbed trailers. Dry van trailers are trailers with a wholly enclosed cargo space comprised of fixed sides, nose, floor and roof, with articulated panels (doors) across the rear and occasionally at selected places on the sides, with the cargo space being permanently incorporated in the trailer itself. Refrigerated van trailers are trailers with a wholly enclosed cargo space comprised of fixed sides, nose, floor and roof, with articulated panels (doors) across the rear and occasionally at selected places on the sides, with the cargo space being permanently incorporated in the trailer and being insulated, possessing specific thermal properties intended for use with self-contained refrigeration systems. Flatbed (or platform) trailers consist of load-carrying main frames and a solid, flat or stepped loading deck or floor permanently incorporated with and supported by frame rails and cross members.
The finished and unfinished chassis subject to this investigation are typically classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheadings: 8716.39.0090 and 8716.90.5060. Imports of finished and unfinished chassis may also enter under HTSUS subheading 8716.90.5010. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive.
SelectUSA, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice of an opportunity to apply for membership on the United States Investment Advisory Council.
The Department of Commerce is currently seeking applications for membership on the United States Investment Advisory Council. The purpose of the Board is to advise the Secretary of Commerce on strategies to attract and retain foreign direct investment to the United States.
Applications for immediate consideration for membership must be received by the Office of SelectUSA by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on Friday, June 30, 2021. The International Trade Administration (ITA) will continue to accept applications under this notice for two years from the deadline to fill any vacancies.
Please submit application information by email to
Rachel David, SelectUSA, U.S. Department of Commerce; telephone: (202) 302-6858; email:
The United States Investment Advisory
SelectUSA is accepting applications for membership on the IAC. The IAC functions solely as an advisory committee. The IAC shall advise the Secretary on U.S. government policies and programs that affect FDI; identify and recommend programs and policies to help the United States attract and retain FDI; and recommend ways to support the position of the United States as the world's preeminent destination for FDI. The IAC shall act as a liaison among the stakeholders represented by the membership and shall provide a forum for the stakeholders on current and emerging issues regarding FDI. The IAC shall report to the Secretary on its activities and recommendations regarding FDI. In creating its reports, the IAC should survey and evaluate the investment and investment-facilitating activities of stakeholders, should identify and examine specific problems facing potential foreign investors, and should examine the needs of stakeholders to inform the IAC's efforts. The IAC should recommend specific solutions to the problems and needs that it identifies.
The IAC shall consist of no more than twenty members appointed by the Secretary. Members shall represent companies and organizations investing, seeking to invest, seeking foreign investors, or facilitating investment across many sectors, including but not limited to:
U.S.-incorporated companies that are majority-owned by foreign companies or by a foreign individual or individuals, or that generate significant foreign direct investment (
Members shall be selected based on their ability to carry out the objectives of the IAC, in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidelines, in a manner that ensures that the IAC is balanced in terms of points of view, demographics, industry subsector, geography of the source and the destination of the FDI, and company size. Members shall represent a broad range of products and services and shall be drawn from large, medium, and small enterprises, private-sector organizations involved in investment, and other investment-related entities including non-governmental organizations, associations, and economic development organizations.
Priority may be given to executives (Chief Executive Officer, Executive Chairman, President, or comparable level of responsibility).
Members shall serve in a representative capacity, representing the views and interests of their sponsoring entity and those of their particular sector (if applicable). Members are not special government employees and will receive no compensation for their participation in IAC activities. Members will not be reimbursed for travel expenses related to IAC activities. Appointments to the IAC shall be made without regard to political affiliation. Because the IAC will advise the Secretary on U.S. international competitiveness in attracting and retaining FDI, each member must be a U.S. national.
Each member shall be appointed for a term of two years and will serve at the pleasure of the Secretary. The Secretary may at his/her discretion reappoint any member to an additional term or terms, provided that the member proves to work effectively on the IAC and that his/her knowledge and advice is still needed.
The Secretary shall designate a Chair and Vice Chair from among the members.
The IAC will meet a minimum of two times a year with, to the extent practical, additional meetings called at the discretion of the Secretary or his/her designee. Meetings will be held in Washington, DC or elsewhere in the United States, or by teleconference, as feasible. Members are expected to attend a majority of IAC meetings.
To be considered for membership, submit the following information by 5:00 p.m. EDT on June 30, 2021 to the email address listed in the
1. Name and title of the individual requesting consideration.
2. A sponsor letter from the applicant on the sponsoring entity's letterhead containing a brief statement of why the applicant should be considered for membership on the IAC. This sponsor letter should also address the applicant's experience and leadership related to foreign direct investment.
3. The applicant's personal resume and short bio (less than 300 words).
4. An affirmative statement that the applicant meets all eligibility criteria, including an affirmative statement that the applicant is not required to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended.
5. Information regarding the ownership and control of the sponsoring entity, including the stock holdings as appropriate.
6. The sponsoring entity's size, place of incorporation, product or service line, major markets in which the entity operates, and the entity's export or import experience.
7. A profile of the entity's foreign direct investment activities, including investment activities, investment plans, investment-facilitation activities, or other foreign direct investment activities.
8. Brief statement describing how the applicant will contribute to the work of the IAC based on his or her unique experience and perspective (not to exceed 100 words).
9. All relevant contact information, including mailing address, fax, email, phone number, and support staff information where relevant.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that imports of methionine from France are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) for the period of investigation July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020. Further, Commerce determines that critical circumstances exist for Adisseo France SAS and Commentary.
Applicable May 17, 2021.
Zachary Shaykin, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2638.
On March 4, 2021, Commerce published in the
The product covered by this investigation is methionine from France. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation,
Commerce did not receive scope comments from interested parties during the course of this investigation. Therefore, Commerce is not modifying the scope language as it appeared in the
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs that were submitted by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the sections of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are in Appendix II of 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
Because Adisseo France SAS and Commentry (collectively, Adisseo) stated prior to the
In the
In the
Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for all other producers and exporters not individually investigated shall be equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated excluding rates that are zero,
Commerce has determined the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for the sole respondent, Adisseo, entirely under section 776 of the Act. Consequently, pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, Commerce's normal practice under these circumstances has been to calculate the all-others rate as a simple average of the alleged dumping margins from the petition.
Consistent with the
Pursuant to section 735 of the Act, the final estimated weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
Normally, Commerce discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with a final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). However, because
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of methionine from France, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 4, 2021 the date of publication in the
Section 735(c)(4) of the Act provides that if there is an affirmative determination of critical circumstances, any suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the later of: (a) The date which is 90 days before the date on which the suspension of liquidation was first ordered; or (b) the date on which notice of initiation of the investigation was published. As noted above, Commerce finds that critical circumstances exist for imports of subject merchandise produced and exported by Adisseo. Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c)(4) of the Act, suspension of liquidation shall continue to apply to unliquidated entries of subject merchandise produced and exported by Adisseo that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date which is 90 days before the date of publication of the
Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for such entries of merchandise equal to the following: (1) The cash deposit rate for Adisseo will be equal to the respondent-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed for Adisseo in the table; (2) if the exporter is not identified in the table above but Adisseo is the producer, then the cash deposit rate will be equal to the respondent-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for Adisseo; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other producers and exporters will be equal to the all-others estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed in the table above.
These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of this final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of methionine from France no later than 45 days after this final determination. If the ITC determines that such injury does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, all cash deposits posted will be refunded, and suspension of liquidation will be lifted. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed above in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section.
This notice will serve as a final reminder to the parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This determination and this notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
The merchandise covered by this investigation is methionine and dl-Hydroxy analogue of dl-methionine, also known as 2-Hydroxy 4-(Methylthio) Butanoic acid (HMTBa), regardless of purity, particle size, grade, or physical form. Methionine has the chemical formula C
Subject merchandise also includes methionine processed in a third country including, but not limited to, refining, converting from liquid to dry or dry to liquid form, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of this investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope methionine or dl-Hydroxy analogue of dl-methionine.
The scope also includes methionine that is commingled (
Excluded from this investigation is United States Pharmacopoeia (USP) grade methionine. In order to qualify for this exclusion, USP grade methionine must meet or exceed all of the chemical, purity, performance, and labeling requirements of the United States Pharmacopeia and the National Formulary for USP grade methionine.
Methionine is currently classified under subheadings 2930.40.00.00 and 2930.90.46.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Methionine has the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry numbers 583-91-5, 4857-44-7, 59-51-8 and 922-50-9. While the HTSUS subheadings and CAS registry number are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Jindal Poly Films Limited of India (Jindal), producer and/or exporter of polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET film) from India, received countervailable subsidies during the period of review (POR), January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018.
Applicable May 17, 2021.
Nicholas Czajkowski or Konrad Ptaszynski, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1395 or (202) 482-6187, respectively.
Commerce published the
The merchandise covered by the order is PET film. For a complete description of the scope,
All issues raised parties' briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed is attached to this notice as an appendix. 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
Based on the comments received from interested parties, we made changes to the net subsidy rate calculated for the mandatory respondent. For a discussion of these issues,
Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy,
We determine the following net countervailable subsidy rate for the period January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018:
Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed for the final results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Consistent with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), upon issuance of these final results, Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after publication of the final results of this review in the
In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amount shown above for Jindal with regard to shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results of review. For all non-reviewed firms, CBP will continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the all-others rate or the most recent company-specific rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
The final results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of public meeting.
The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and its advisory committees will meet via web conference from June 1, 2021, through June 16, 2021.
The Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) will begin at 8 a.m. on Monday, June 1, 2021, and continue through Friday, June 4, 2021. The Council's Advisory Panel (AP) will begin at 8 a.m. on Thursday, June 3, 2021, through Friday, June 4, 2021, and on Monday, June 7, 2021, through Wednesday, June 9, 2021. The Council will meet on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, through Friday, June 11, 2021, and on Monday, June 14, 2021, through Wednesday, June 16, 2021. All times listed are Alaska Time.
The meetings will be by web conference. Join online through the links at
Diana Evans, Council staff; email:
The SSC agenda will include the following issues:
The agenda is subject to change, and the latest version will be posted at
In addition to providing ongoing scientific advice for fishery management decisions, the SSC functions as the Council's primary peer review panel for scientific information, as described by the Magnuson-Stevens Act section 302(g)(1)(e), and the National Standard 2 guidelines (78 FR 43066). The peer-review process is also deemed to satisfy the requirements of the Information Quality Act, including the OMB Peer Review Bulletin guidelines.
The Advisory Panel agenda will include the following issues:
The Council agenda will include the following issues. The Council may take appropriate action on any of the issues identified.
You can attend the meeting online using a computer, tablet, or smartphone; or by telephone only. Connection information will be posted online at:
Public comment letters will be accepted and should be submitted electronically through the links at
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a public meeting.
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council will hold a one-day meeting via webinar of its Ad Hoc Red Snapper & Grouper-Tilefish Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Advisory Panel (AP).
The meeting will convene on Wednesday, June 2, 2021, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EDT. For agenda details, see
The meeting will take place via webinar; you may register by visiting
Dr. Ava Lasseter, Anthropologist
The following items are on the agenda, though agenda items may be addressed out of order (changes will be noted on the Council's website when possible).
The Advisory Panel will begin with Welcome and Introductions, Adoption of Agenda, Approval of November 7, 2018, Meeting Summary, and Scope of work.
The AP will receive presentations on Red Snapper-IFQ and Grouper-Tilefish-IFQ Review and for Amendments 36B and 36C, followed by discussion and recommendations and public comments.
The AP will discuss any Other Business items.
You may attend the meeting via webinar by visiting
The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on
Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the group for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency at least 5 working days prior to the meeting.
16 U.S.C. 1801
The Corporation for National and Community Service.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Corporation for National and Community Service, operating as AmeriCorps, is proposing a new information collection.
Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the
You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:
(1)
(2) By hand delivery or by courier to the AmeriCorps mailroom at the mail address given in paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
(3) Electronically through
Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available to the public through
Xiaodong Zhang, 703-251-0883, or by email at
1. What are the grantees' approaches for utilizing VGF funds to improve volunteer recruitment, retention, and support of volunteers within their states and among volunteer organizations?
2. What are promising practices and challenges in implementing these programs?
3. What are preliminary outcomes of these programs on volunteer
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. All written comments will be available for public inspection on
The Corporation for National and Community Service.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Corporation for National and Community Service, operating as AmeriCorps, is proposing a new information collection.
Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the
You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:
(1)
(2) By hand delivery or by courier to the AmeriCorps mailroom at the mail address given in paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
(3) Electronically through
Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available to the public through
Xiaodong Zhang, 703-251-0883, or by email at
1. Determine what recovery coach models look like (activity, setting, modality, etc.).
2. Describe promising practices and challenges in implementing these models.
3. Measure the effectiveness of the recovery coach model in improving outcomes for grantee organizations, recovery coaches, and beneficiaries.
AmeriCorps will conduct a bundled evaluation of grantees that are implementing opioid recovery coaching models. Bundling allows AmeriCorps to combine a group of small programs across different funding streams with similar program models and intended outcomes into a single evaluation. Spanning 27 months, the evaluation will work with 14 grantees to examine program design, implementation, and outcomes using surveys, interviews, and focus groups with a wide range of stakeholders, including grantee staff, volunteers who support the peer recovery coach model, beneficiaries, and staff at organizations which partner with grantees. This is a new information collection.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or
Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).
Notice of a new system of records.
CIGIE proposes to establish a system of records that is subject to the Privacy Act of 1974. Pursuant to Public Law 116-136, CIGIE proposes this system of records in furtherance of the statutory mandate of CIGIE's Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) to conduct oversight of the funds disseminated per the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act); the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2020; the Families First Coronavirus Response Act; divisions M and N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021; and any other act primarily making appropriations for Coronavirus response and related activities.
This proposal will be effective without further notice on June 16, 2021 unless comments are received that would result in a contrary determination.
Submit comments identified by “CIGIE-6” by any of the following methods:
1.
2.
Virginia Grebasch, Senior Counsel, Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, (202) 292-2600 or
In 2008, Congress established CIGIE as an independent entity within the executive branch in order to address integrity, economy, and effectiveness issues that transcend individual Government agencies; and increase the professionalism and effectiveness of personnel by developing policies, standards, and approaches to aid in the establishment of a well-trained and highly skilled workforce in the offices of the Inspector General. CIGIE's membership is comprised of all Inspectors General whose offices are established under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app (IG Act), as well as the Controller of the Office of Federal Financial Management, a designated official of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, the Special Counsel of the Office of Special Counsel, the Deputy Director of the Office of Personnel Management, the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Inspectors General of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Library of Congress, Capitol Police, Government Publishing Office, Government Accountability Office, and the Architect of the Capitol. The Deputy Director for Management of OMB serves as the Executive Chairperson of CIGIE.
Section 15010 of Public Law 116-136, established the PRAC as a committee within CIGIE. The mission of the PRAC is to promote transparency and conduct and support oversight to: (1) Prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement of covered funds; and (2) mitigate major risks that cut across programs and agencies with respect to covered funds. The term “covered funds” means any funds, including but not limited to loans, that are made available in any form to any non-Federal entity, not including an individual, under: The CARES Act; the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2020; the Families First Coronavirus Response Act; divisions M and N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021; or any other act primarily making appropriations for the Federal Government's Coronavirus response and related activities.
The new system of records described in this notice, the PRAC Accountability Data System (CIGIE-6), will enable CIGIE to carry out its responsibilities to conduct oversight of covered funds and the Coronavirus response. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), CIGIE has provided a report of this new system of records to OMB and to Congress. The new system of records reads as follows:
PRAC Accountability Data System (PADS)—CIGIE-6.
Controlled Unclassified Information.
The location of paper records contained within the PADS is the headquarters of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), 1717 H Street NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20006. Records maintained in electronic form are principally located in contractor-hosted data centers in the United States. Contact the System Manager identified below for additional information.
Executive Director, Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, 1717 H Street NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 292-2600,
Section 11 of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app (IG Act); 5 U.S.C. 301; 44 U.S.C. 3101; Public Law 116-136; Public Law 116-123; Public Law 116-127; and any other act primarily making appropriations for Coronavirus response and related activities.
To carry out the PRAC's responsibilities to conduct oversight of any funds, including but not limited to loans, that are made available in any form to any non-Federal entity, not including an individual, under: Public Law 116-136; Public Law 116-123; Public Law 116-127; or any other act primarily making appropriations for Coronavirus response and related
This system contains records on individuals acting in a personal capacity who relate to PRAC efforts undertaken in support of its mission to conduct and support oversight of Coronavirus Funds and the Coronavirus Response to prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement and mitigate major risks that cut across programs and agencies. Individuals include but are not limited to those who have applied for, sought, or received Federal funds. In addition, these individuals include:
(a) Individuals who are or have been the subject of investigations or other inquiries identified by or submitted to the PRAC;
(b) Individuals who are or have been witnesses, complainants, or informants in investigations or other inquiries identified by or submitted to the PRAC;
(c) Individuals who are or have been potential subjects or parties to an investigation or other inquiry identified by or submitted to the PRAC;
(d) Individuals who are or have been related to entities or individuals that are or have been a subject of, potential subject of, or party to an investigation or other inquiry identified by or submitted to the PRAC;
(e)Individuals who have or have had increased risk factors indicating they may have been involved with possible fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, or improper payments related to Federal funds; and
(f) Individuals who are or have been related to entities or individuals that have or have had increased risk factors indicating they may have been involved with possible fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, or improper payments related to Federal funds.
The system maintains records that contribute to the oversight of Coronavirus Funds and the Coronavirus Response and effective oversight of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement and mitigation of major risks that cut across programs and agencies related to Coronavirus Funds and the Coronavirus Response. These records may include, but are not limited to, records concerning: Coronavirus Funds and other Federal funding; the Coronavirus Response; individuals in their personal capacity or individuals who are employees or representatives of businesses, corporations, tribal governments, not-for-profit organizations, or other organizations that have applied for, sought, or received Coronavirus Funds or have been involved in any capacity in the Coronavirus Response. Such records may include, but are not limited to, these individuals' home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers or tax identifications numbers, company business addresses, business financial information and records, bank account information, payroll records, personal contact information, business affiliations, and employment history. The records may further include:
(a) Letters, memoranda, and other documents describing complaints, derogatory information, or alleged criminal, civil, or administrative misconduct; and
(b) General intelligence and relevant data, leads for the PRAC or Offices of Inspector General (or other applicable oversight and law enforcement entities), reports of investigations and related exhibits, statements and affidavits, and records obtained or generated during an investigation or other inquiry, including but not limited to risk-based analytical research.
Publicly and/or commercially available data sets and other source material; Federal agencies; and individuals and entities, including states and local jurisdictions, tribal governments, businesses, corporations, and other organizations, that have applied for, sought, or received Coronavirus Funds or other Federal funds or have been involved in any capacity in the Coronavirus Response. The subjects of investigations and other inquiries; individuals and entities with which the subjects of investigations and other inquiries are associated; Federal, state, local, and foreign law enforcement and non-law enforcement agencies and entities; private citizens; witnesses; and informants.
In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b), all or portions of the records or information contained in this system may specifically be disclosed outside of CIGIE as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:
A. To a Member of Congress in response to an inquiry from that Member made at the request of the individual. In such cases, however, the Member's right to a record is no greater than that of the individual.
B. If the disclosure of certain records to the Department of Justice (DOJ) is relevant and necessary to litigation, CIGIE may disclose those records to the DOJ. CIGIE may make such a disclosure if one of the following parties is involved in the litigation or has an interest in the litigation:
1. CIGIE or any component thereof; or
2. Any employee or former employee of CIGIE in his or her official capacity; or
3. Any employee or former employee of CIGIE in his or her individual capacity when the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee; or
4. The United States, if CIGIE determines that litigation is likely to affect CIGIE or any of its components.
C. If disclosure of certain records to a court, adjudicative body before which CIGIE is authorized to appear, individual or entity designated by CIGIE or otherwise empowered to resolve disputes, counsel or other representative, party, or potential witness is relevant and necessary to litigation, CIGIE may disclose those records to the court, adjudicative body, individual or entity, counsel or other representative, party, or potential witness. CIGIE may make such a disclosure if one of the following parties is involved in the litigation or has an interest in the litigation:
1. CIGIE or any component thereof; or
2. Any employee or former employee of CIGIE in his or her official capacity; or
3. Any employee or former employee of CIGIE in his or her individual capacity when the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee; or
4. The United States, if CIGIE determines that litigation is likely to affect CIGIE or any of its components.
D. To the appropriate Federal, state, local, tribal, or foreign agency responsible for investigating, prosecuting, enforcing, or implementing a statute, rule, regulation, or order, if the information is relevant to a violation or potential violation of civil or criminal law or regulation within the jurisdiction of the receiving entity.
E. To officials and employees of any Federal agency to the extent the record contains information that is relevant to that agency's decision concerning the hiring, appointment, or retention of an employee; issuance of a security clearance; execution of a security or
F. To the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to records management inspections being conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.
G. To contractors, grantees, consultants, volunteers, or other individuals performing or working on a contract, interagency agreement, service, grant, cooperative agreement, job, or other activity for CIGIE and who have a need to access the information in the performance of their duties or activities for CIGIE.
H. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when: CIGIE suspects or has confirmed that there has been a breach of the system of records; CIGIE has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed breach there is a risk of harm to individuals, CIGIE (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security; and the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with CIGIE's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed breach or to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.
I. To another Federal agency or Federal entity, when: CIGIE determines that information from this system of records is reasonably necessary to assist the recipient agency or entity in responding to a suspected or confirmed breach; or preventing, minimizing, or remedying the risk of harm to individuals, the recipient agency or entity (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security, resulting from a suspected or confirmed breach.
J. To Federal agencies and independent certified public accounting firms that have a need for the information in order to audit the financial statements of CIGIE.
K. To an organization or an individual in the public or private sector if there is reason to believe the recipient is or could become the target of a particular criminal activity or conspiracy, or to the extent the information is relevant to the protection or life or property.
L. To officials of CIGIE, as well as CIGIE members and their employees, who have need of the information in the performance of their duties.
M. To the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in accordance with OPM's responsibility for evaluation and oversight of Federal personnel management.
N. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons, to the extent necessary to respond to or refer correspondence.
O. To the news media and the public, unless it is determined that release of the specific information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
P. To populate public-facing government websites to promote transparency and oversight of Coronavirus Funds and the Coronavirus Response, unless it is determined that release of the specific information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Q. Disclosure may be made to (a) complainants and/or victims to the extent necessary to provide such persons with information and explanations concerning the results of the investigation or other inquiry arising from the matters about which they complained and/or with respect to which they were a victim, and (b) to an individual who has been interviewed or contacted by the PRAC pursuant to an investigation or other inquiry, to the extent that the PRAC may provide copies of that individual's statements, testimony, or records produced.
Information within this system of records is maintained in paper/or electronic form.
These records are retrieved by the name or other programmatic identifier assigned to the individuals on whom they are maintained.
The information is retained and disposed of in accordance with the General Records Schedule and/or the CIGIE records schedule applicable to the record and/or otherwise required by the Federal Records Act and implementing regulations.
Paper records are located in locked file storage areas or in specified areas to which only authorized personnel have access. Electronic records are protected from unauthorized access through password identification procedures, limited access, firewalls, and other system-based protection methods.
Part of this system is exempt from notification and access requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), and (k)(2). To the extent that this system is not subject to exemption, it is subject to notification and access requirements. Individuals seeking notification and access to any record contained in this system of records, or seeking to contest its content, may inquire in writing to the System Manager listed above. CIGIE has published a rule, entitled “Privacy Act Regulations,” to establish its procedures relating to access, maintenance, disclosure and amendment of records which are in a CIGIE system of records per the Privacy Act, promulgated at 5 CFR part 9801 (
See “Records Access Procedures” above.
See “Records Access Procedures” above.
CIGIE has exempted this system of records from the following provisions of the Privacy Act pursuant to the general authority in 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2): 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G)-(H), (e)(5), and (e)(8); (f); and (g). Additionally, CIGIE has exempted this system from the following provisions of the Privacy Act pursuant to the general authority in 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and (k)(2): 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1) and (e)(4)(G)-(H); and (f). See 5 CFR part 9801.
N/A.
Department of the Army, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 16, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Department of the Army, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-9, Soldier & Family Readiness Division, 600 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310; ATTN: Jill Knaus, or call 703-695-7095.
Respondents may be surviving spouses, parents, and dependents over the age of 18 of fallen Service members. Applicants will be nominated by the Army's Survivor Outreach Services office or survivor-related Non-Federal Entities. Individuals will receive a fillable PDF application and cover letter outlining the SAWG's purpose and length of service. The staff reviews all applications and verifies the applicant is an Army Survivor. Applications are sorted into a list of 1-20 based on the criteria listed in the SAWG Charter and the list is provided to the Chief of Staff, Army (CSA) for final approval. Individuals not selected will be notified by email that they were not selected. Those selected will be notified by telephone by program manager. At the completion of the application process, the CSA will select new members to fill up to 12 positions every year the SAWG exists.
Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Department of Defense, (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The DoD has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by June 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Angela Duncan, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Duncan at
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 16, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, 27130 Telegraph Road, Quantico, VA 22134; ATTN: Ms. Valerie Heil, or call 703-692-3754.
The Defense Information System for Security (DISS) is a DoD personnel security system and is the authoritative source for clearance information resulting in access determinations to sensitive/classified information and facilities. Collection and maintenance of personal data in DISS is required to facilitate the initiation, investigation and adjudication of information relevant to DoD security clearances and employment suitability determinations for active duty military, civilian employees, and contractors requiring such credentials. Facility Security Officers (FSOs) working in private companies that contract with DoD and who need access to the DISS system to update security-related information about their company's employees must complete DD Form 2962 (OMB Control Number 0704-0542). Specific uses include: Facilitation for DoD Adjudicators and Security Managers to obtain accurate up-to-date eligibility and access information on all personnel (military, civilian and contractor personnel) adjudicated by the DoD. The DoD Adjudicators and Security Managers are also able to update eligibility and access levels of military, civilian and contractor personnel nominated for access to sensitive DoD information. Once granted access, the FSOs maintain employee personal information, submit requests for investigations, and submit other relevant personnel security information into DISS on over 1,000,000 contract employees annually.
The Office of the Director of Administration and Management, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 16, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to 9000 Defense Pentagon, 5B890 Washington, DC 20301, ATTN: Mr. Dajonte Holsey or call 703-571-2939.
Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Department of Defense (DoD).
Information collection notice.
In compliance with the
Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 16, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Defense Finance and Accounting Services, Kellen Stout, 8899 E 56th St., Indianapolis, IN 46249 or call (317) 212-1801.
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, Department of Defense, (DoD).
30-Day information collection notice.
The DoD has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by June 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
Angela Duncan, 571-372-7574, or
You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:
•
Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Duncan at
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
Notice of availability.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is announcing the availability of a Preliminary Energy Savings Analysis of the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (Preliminary Analysis). DOE welcomes written comments from interested parties on any subject within the scope of this Preliminary Analysis.
DOE will accept written comments and information on the Preliminary Analysis no later than June 16, 2021.
A copy of the Preliminary Analysis is available at
Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand delivery/courier, the Department has found it necessary to make temporary modifications to the comment submission process in light of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. DOE is currently accepting only electronic submissions at this time. If a commenter finds that this change poses an undue hardship, please the parties listed below to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once the Covid-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission, including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
Mr. Jeremiah Williams; U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, EE-5B, Washington, DC 20585; (202) 287-1941;
Mr. Matthew Ring; U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, GC-33, Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586-2555;
Title III of the Energy Conservation and Production Act, as amended (ECPA), establishes requirements for building energy conservation standards, administered by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program. (42 U.S.C. 6831
In addition, on January 20, 2021, the President issued Executive Order 13990, “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis.” 86 FR 7037 (Jan. 25, 2021). The Executive Order directed DOE to consider publishing for notice and comment a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding the final technical determination regarding the final technical determination regarding the 2018 IECC by May 2021.
The 2021 IECC (2021 edition), the most recent edition of the IECC, was published on January 29, 2021, triggering the statutorily required DOE review process. The IECC is developed through an industry consensus process administered by the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC has an established program for regular review of the IECC, identifying whether proposed changes have energy and cost impacts, and incorporating changes approved by public officials making up the ICC governmental voting body. Updated editions of the IECC are typically published every three years. More information on the ICC code development process is available at:
To meet the statutory requirement, DOE conducted a Preliminary Energy Savings Analysis of the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (Preliminary Analysis) to quantify the expected energy savings associated with the 2021 IECC. The Preliminary Analysis indicates, of the 35 proposed code changes which directly impact energy use, 29 changes resulted in a
DOE's Preliminary review and analysis of the 2021 IECC identified 11 key changes which are expected to have a significant and measurable impact on energy efficiency in residential buildings. These changes are expected to increase energy savings, impact a significant fraction of new homes, and can be reasonably quantified through the established methodology. More information on these changes and their expected energy savings impacts are presented in a separate technical analysis,
Review of the 2021 IECC indicates the updated model code will increase energy efficiency in residential buildings. Residential buildings meeting the 2021 IECC (compared to the previous 2018 IECC edition) are expected to incur the following annual savings on a weighted national average basis:
• 9.38 percent of
• 8.79 percent of
• 8.66 percent of
• 8.66 percent of
The full Preliminary Analysis, including an assessment of the expected energy and energy cost impacts, is available via the DOE Building Energy Codes Program:
States can experience significant benefits by updating their codes to reflect current construction standards, a total estimated $74.34 billion in energy cost savings and 435.43 MMT of avoided CO
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding the Preliminary Analysis no later than the date provided in the
The
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Do not submit to
DOE processes submissions made through
Comments and documents submitted via email also will be posted to
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.
Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.
According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 10, 2021, by Kelly Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
Notification of decision and order.
The U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) gives notice of a Decision and Order (Case Number 2020-020) that grants to Ningbo FOTILE Kitchen Ware Co. Ltd. (“FOTILE”) a waiver from specified portions of the DOE test procedure for determining the energy and water consumption of specified dishwashers. Under the Decision and Order, FOTILE is required to test and rate the specified basic models of its dishwashers in accordance with the alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order.
The Decision and Order is effective on May 17, 2021.
Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Email:
Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-2588. Email:
The Decision and Order will terminate upon the compliance date of any future amendment to the test procedure for dishwashers located at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”), part 430, subpart B, appendix C1 that addresses the issues presented in this waiver. At such time, FOTILE must use the relevant test procedure for this product for any testing to demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards, and any other representations of energy use.
In accordance with section 430.27(f)(2) of title 10 of the CFR, DOE hereby provides notice of the issuance of its Decision and Order as set forth below. The Decision and Order grants FOTILE a waiver from the applicable test procedure at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix C1 for specified basic models of dishwashers, and provides that FOTILE must test and rate such products using the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order. FOTILE's representations concerning the energy and water consumption of the specified basic models must be based on testing according to the provisions and restrictions in the alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order, and any such representations must fairly disclose the test results. Distributors, retailers, and private labelers are held to the same requirements when making representations regarding the energy and water consumption of these products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
Consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(j), not later than July 16, 2021, any manufacturer currently distributing in commerce in the United States products employing a technology or characteristic that results in the same need for a waiver from the applicable test procedure must submit a petition for
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (“EPCA”),
Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the product complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for dishwashers is set forth at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix C1, “Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Dishwashers” (“Appendix C1”).
Any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). DOE will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). DOE may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures.
As soon as practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the
On October 15, 2020, DOE received from FOTILE a petition for waiver and a petition for interim waiver from the DOE test procedure applicable to dishwashers set forth in Appendix C1. In its petition for waiver, FOTILE stated that the subject dishwasher models, which FOTILE described as “in-sink” compact dishwashers, do not have a main detergent compartment and have different installation instructions than under-counter or under-sink dishwashers. FOTILE requested that DOE waive sections of the dishwasher test procedure pertaining to installation requirements and placement of the detergent. FOTILE suggested an alternate test procedure to install the dishwasher basic models from the top of a rectangular enclosure (as opposed to the front) and to specify placement of the detergent directly into the dishwasher chamber.
DOE posted the petition on the DOE website, absent any information for which petitioner requested treatment as confidential business information, at:
In the Notification of Petition for Waiver, DOE noted that FOTILE's alternate test procedure specified a test enclosure that differs from the installation instructions provided in the operation manual. 86 FR 8548, 8549. Specifically, the alternate test procedure retained a requirement specified in Section 2.1 of Appendix C1 that the enclosure be brought into the closest contact with the appliance as allowed by the configuration of the dishwasher. In the case of FOTILE's basic model, this would include close contact
For the reasons explained here and in the Notification of Petition for Waiver, absent a waiver, the basic models identified by FOTILE in its petition cannot be tested and rated for energy and water consumption on a basis representative of their true energy consumption characteristics. DOE has reviewed the recommended procedure suggested by FOTILE and concludes that, with the modification discussed below, it will allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of the product, while alleviating the testing problems associated with FOTILE's implementation of DOE's applicable dishwashers test procedure for the specified basic models. The alternate test procedure required under this Decision and Order modifies that specified in the Interim Waiver Order. In the alternate test procedure required under this Decision and Order, the height of the rectangular test enclosure must be the height that provides the minimum clearances as specified in the manufacturer's operation manual. While DOE did not receive any comments on this topic in response to the Notification of Petition for Waiver, installing compact in-sink dishwashers according to manufacturer's instructions is representative, particularly since the manufacturer's instructions explicitly provide a minimum height for the cabinetry in which the dishwasher is installed. Additionally, the alternate test procedure requirements in the Interim Waiver Order may result in varying placement of the enclosure bottom, given that the drain pipe at the bottom of the unit could be configured differently in different installations, resulting in different enclosure heights corresponding to the closest contact that the configuration of the dishwasher would allow. This could introduce variability in the measured energy consumption. The specification to install the subject basic models consistent with the installation instructions provided in the operation manual will ensure reproducibility of test results and further ensure the test procedure provides results that are representative of the average use cycle.
As provided in 10 CFR 430.27(i), to the extent that FOTILE has already certified the subject basic models using the procedure permitted in DOE's grant of the interim test procedure waiver, FOTILE is not required to re-test and re-rate those basic models so long as: It used that alternative procedure to certify the compliance of the basic model after DOE granted the company's interim waiver request; changes have not been made to those basic models that would cause them to use more energy or otherwise be less energy efficient; and FOTILE does not modify the certified rating.
For subsequent certification of the subject basic models, FOTILE must test and rate the specified dishwasher basic models according to the alternate test procedure specified in this Decision and Order.
This Decision and Order is applicable only to the basic models listed and does not extend to any other basic models. DOE evaluates and grants waivers for only those basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. FOTILE may request that DOE extend the scope of this waiver to include additional basic models that employ the same technology as those listed in this waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). FOTILE may also submit another petition for waiver from the test procedure for additional basic models that employ a different technology and meet the criteria for test procedure waivers. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1).
DOE notes that it may modify or rescind the waiver at any time upon DOE's determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, FOTILE may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if the company discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
As set forth above, the test procedure specified in this Decision and Order is not the same as the test procedure offered by FOTILE. If FOTILE believes that the alternate test method it suggested provides representative results and is less burdensome than the test method required by this Decision and Order, FOTILE may submit a request for modification under 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2) that addresses the concerns that DOE has specified with that procedure. FOTILE may also submit another less burdensome alternative test procedure not expressly considered in this notification under the same provision.
In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2), DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission staff concerning the FOTILE petition for waiver.
After careful consideration of all the material that was submitted by FOTILE and the various public-facing materials (
(1) For certifications required on and after the date of publication of this Order in the
(2) The alternate test procedure for the FOTILE basic models listed in paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for dishwashers prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix C1, with the modifications provided below. All other requirements of Appendix C1 and DOE's other relevant regulations remain applicable.
In section 2.1, Installation, add at the end of the section:
A compact in-sink dishwasher with a combination sink must be installed in a rectangular enclosure constructed of nominal
In section 2.10, Detergent, add at the end of the section:
For compact in-sink dishwashers with a combination sink that have neither prewash program nor a main detergent compartment, determine the amount of main wash detergent (in grams) to be added directly into the washing chamber according to section 2.10.2 of this appendix.
(3)
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect according to the provisions of 10 CFR 430.27.
(5) DOE issues this waiver on the condition that the statements, representations, test data, and information provided by FOTILE are valid. If FOTILE makes any modifications to the controls or configurations of these basic models, such modifications will render the waiver invalid with respect to that basic model, and FOTILE will either be required to use the current Federal test method or submit a new application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may rescind or modify this waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of a basic model's true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, FOTILE may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if FOTILE discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
(6) FOTILE remains obligated to fulfill any applicable requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 429.
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 11, 2021, by Kelly Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions 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 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 43,304). 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 Normanskill Hydroelectric Project. Commission staff intends to conduct its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
l.
The Normanskill Project is operated in a run-of-river mode with an average annual generation of 2,863 megawatt-hours between 2010 and 2019.
m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's website at
All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “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 submitting the filing; 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. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
You may also register online at
n.
o.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions 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 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 Groveville Project. Commission staff intends to conduct its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
l. The Groveville Hydroelectric Project consists of: (1) A 167-foot-long, 37-foot-high concrete gravity dam, with a 140-foot-long spillway having a crest elevation of 172.4 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29) and topped with 3-foot-high wooden flashboards; (2) an impoundment with a gross storage capacity of approximately 43 acre-feet and a surface area of 5 acres at a normal pool elevation of 175.4 feet NGVD29; (3) an intake structure with two gates and a 27-foot-high, 34-foot-wide trash rack; (4) a 9-foot-diameter, approximately 140-foot-long riveted steel underground penstock; (5) a powerhouse containing three fixed-output turbine-generator units with a total rated capacity of 927 kilowatts; (6) a 4-foot-high submerged stilling basin weir approximately 60 feet downstream of the dam spillway; (7) a 20-foot-wide, 90-foot-long tailrace; (8) a 20-foot-long underground generator lead connecting to a step-up transformer that connects to a 13.2-kilovolt, 40-foot-long underground transmission line that then connects to a 15-foot-long aerial transmission line before connecting to the regional grid; and (9) appurtenant facilities.
Lower Saranac Hydro proposes to continue operating the project in a run-of-river mode, with no changes to the existing operation or facilities.
m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's website at
All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “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 submitting the filing; 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. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
You may also register online at
n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice: (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 comply with 40 CFR 121.5(b), including
o.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of data availability.
Under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) trading program regulations, EPA allocates emission allowances to existing electricity generating units as provided in a notice of data availability (NODA). In the Revised CSAPR Update promulgated earlier this year, EPA finalized default allocations of CSAPR NO
Questions concerning this notice should be addressed to Michael Cohen at (202) 343-9497 or
In the Revised CSAPR Update, EPA established new emissions budgets for ozone season emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO
To ensure that the enhanced control stringency of the Revised CSAPR Update's new state emissions budgets will apply only after the rule's effective date, for the control period in 2021 the rule provides for EPA to issue supplemental allowances for the covered states in amounts determined under a formula that accounts for the portion of the 2021 ozone season occurring before the rule's effective date.
Through this NODA, EPA is providing notice of the availability of data on the unit-level allocations of CSAPR NO
In accordance with the deadlines set forth in the regulations, EPA will generally record allocations of CSAPR NO
EPA notes that an allocation or lack of allocation of emission allowances to a given unit does not constitute a determination that CSAPR does or does not apply to the unit.
40 CFR 97.1011(a)(1).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, EPA announces an upcoming meeting of the Mobile Sources Technical Review Subcommittee (MSTRS), which is a subcommittee under the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC). This is a virtual meeting and open to the public. The meeting will include discussion of current topics and presentations about activities being conducted by EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality. MSTRS listserv subscribers will receive notification when the agenda is available on the Subcommittee website. To subscribe to the MSTRS listserv, send an email to
EPA will hold a virtual public meeting on Tuesday, June 15, 2021 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). Please monitor the website
For information on the public meeting or to register to attend, please contact
Any member of the public who wishes to attend the meeting or provide comments should express this intent by emailing
During the meeting, the Subcommittee may also hear progress reports from its workgroups as well as updates and announcements on Office of Transportation and Air Quality activities of general interest to attendees.
The virtual public meeting will provide interested parties the opportunity to participate in this Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
EPA is asking all meeting attendees, even those who do not intend to speak, to register for the meeting by sending an email to the address listed in the
Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the meeting logistics, including potential additional sessions, will be posted online at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of data availability.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the availability of data on the administration of the assurance provisions of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) trading programs for the control periods in 2020. Total emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO
Objections to the information referenced in this notice must be received on or before June 16, 2021.
Submit your objections via email to
Questions concerning this action should be addressed to Garrett Powers at (202) 564-2300 or
The regulations for each CSAPR trading program contain “assurance provisions” designed to ensure that the emissions reductions required from each state
When a state's assurance level is exceeded, responsibility for surrendering the required additional allowances is apportioned among groups of units in the state represented by “common designated representatives” based on the extent to which each such group's emissions exceeded the group's share of the state's assurance level. For the CSAPR NO
In this document, EPA is providing notice of the data relied on to determine the amounts of the exceedances of the Mississippi and Missouri assurance levels discussed above, as required under 40 CFR 97.825(b)(1)(ii), and notice of the preliminary calculations of the amounts of additional allowances that the owners and operators of certain Mississippi and Missouri units must surrender as a result of the exceedances, as required under 40 CFR 97.825(b)(2)(ii).
The data and preliminary calculations are set forth in an Excel spreadsheet entitled “2020_CSAPR_assurance_provision_calculations_prelim.xlsx” available at
Any objections should be strictly limited to whether EPA has identified the data and performed the calculations in the spreadsheet correctly in accordance with the regulations. Objections must include (1) precise identification of the specific data or calculations the commenter believes are inaccurate, (2) new proposed data or calculations upon which the commenter believes EPA should rely instead, and (3) the reasons why EPA should rely on the commenter's proposed data or calculations and not the data and calculations referenced in this notice.
Export-Import Bank of the United States.
Notice.
On April 23, 2021, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) requested information on the U.S. and foreign content in certain transformational export areas and sought public comment within 21 days of the date the notice appeared in the
Interested parties may also submit comments to
EXIM is extending the comment period on FR Doc. 2021-08418 an additional 14 days to May 28th, 2021. Comments can be made at
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before July 16, 2021. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email
For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele, (202) 418-2991.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the FCC seeks specific comment on how it can further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted on or before June 16, 2021.
Comments should be sent to
For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the web page
The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this
On April 27, 2012, the Commission released the Empowering Consumers to Prevent and Detect Billing for Unauthorized Charges (“Cramming”), Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CG Docket No. 11-116, CG Docket No. 09-158, CC Docket No. 98-170, FCC 12-42 (Cramming Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking); published at 77 FR 30972, May 24, 2012, which determined that additional rules are needed to help consumers prevent and detect the placement of unauthorized charges on their telephone bills, an unlawful and fraudulent practice commonly referred to as “cramming.”
Beginning in the 1980s, the Commission adopted a series of regulations to implement statutory directives requiring wireline telephone handsets in the United States (for use with the legacy telephone network) to be hearing aid compatible. In 2010, the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA), Public Law 111-260, sec. 102, 710(b), 124 Stat. 2751, 2753 (CVAA) (codified at 47 U.S.C. 610(b)), amended by Public Law 111-265, 124 Stat. 2795 (technical corrections to the CVAA), amended section 710(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, to apply the HAC requirements to ACS telephonic CPE, including VoIP telephones. In accordance with this provision, the Commission adopted Access to Telecommunications Equipment and Services by Persons with Disabilities et al., Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, FCC 17-135, released October 26, 2017, which amended the HAC rules to cover ACS telephonic CPE to the extent such devices are designed to be held to the ear and provide two-way voice communication via a built-in speaker.
The information collections contain third-party disclosure and labeling requirements. The information is used to inform consumers who purchase or use wireline telephone equipment whether the telephone is hearing aid compatible; to ensure that manufacturers comply with applicable regulations and technical criteria; to ensure that information about ACS telephonic CPE is available in a database administered by the Administrative Council for Terminal Attachments (ACTA) (an organization, previously created pursuant to FCC regulations, whose key function is to maintain a database of telephone equipment); and to facilitate the filing of complaints about the ACS telephonic CPE.
• 47 CFR 68.224 requires that every non-hearing aid compatible wireline telephone used with the legacy wireline network that is offered for sale to the public contain in a conspicuous location on the surface of its packaging a statement that the telephone is not hearing aid compatible. If the handset is offered for sale without a surrounding package, then the telephone must be affixed with a written statement that the telephone is not hearing aid compatible. In addition, each handset must be accompanied by instructions in accordance with 47 CFR 62.218(b)(2).
• 47 CFR 68.300 requires that all wireline telephones used with the legacy wireline network that are manufactured in the United States (other than for export) or imported for use in the United States and that are hearing aid compatible have the letters “HAC” permanently affixed.
• 47 CFR 68.502(a) of the Commission's rules contains information collection requirements for ACS telephonic CPE that are similar to the HAC label and notice requirements in 47 CFR 68.224 and 68.300 (discussed above),
• 47 CFR 68.501 of the Commission's rules requires responsible parties to obtain certifications of their equipment by using a third-party Telecommunications Certification Body (TCB) or a Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. (A responsible party is the party, such as the manufacturer, that is responsible for the compliance of ACS telephonic CPE with the hearing aid compatibility rules and other applicable technical criteria. A Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is a procedure whereby a responsible party makes measurements or takes steps to ensure that CPE complies with technical standards, which results in a document by the same name.) Section 68.501 of the Commission's rules applies to ACS telephonic CPE the rule sections defining the roles of TCBs and the uses of Supplier's Declarations of Conformity for wireline handsets used with the legacy telephone network.
• 47 CFR 68.504 of the Commission's rules requires information about ACS telephonic CPE to be included in a database administered by ACTA. In addition, ACS telephonic CPE must be labeled as required by ACTA.
• 47 CFR 68.502(b)-(d) of the Commission's rules requires responsible parties to: Warrant that ACS telephonic CPE complies with applicable regulations and technical criteria; give the user instructions required by ACTA for ACS telephonic CPE that is hearing aid compatible; give the user a notice for ACS telephonic CPE that is not hearing aid compatible; and notify the purchaser or user of ACS telephonic CPE whose approval is revoked, that the purchaser or user must discontinue its use.
• 47 CFR 68.503 of the Commission's rules requires manufacturers of ACS telephonic CPE to designate an agent for service of process for complaints that may be filed at the FCC.
• 47 CFR 68.5 requires that telephone manufacturers seeking a waiver of 47 CFR 68.4(a)(1) (requiring that certain telephones be hearing aid compatible) demonstrate that compliance with the rule is technologically infeasible or too costly. Information is used by FCC staff to determine whether to grant or dismiss the request.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the FCC seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.” The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted on or before June 16, 2021.
Comments should be sent to
For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the web page
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the FCC seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”
May 19, 2021; 10 a.m.
This meeting will be held by video-conference only.
This meeting will be open to the public.
1. National Shipper Advisory Committee and Federal Advisory Committee Act Implementation.
2. Staff Briefing on Options to Update and Publish Commission Organizational Information and Delegations of Authority.
Rachel Dickon, Secretary, (202) 523-5725.
Federal Trade Commission.
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”), the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) is seeking public comment on its proposal to extend for an additional three years the Office of Management and Budget clearances for information collection requirements in Regulations B, E, M, and Z, which are enforced by the Commission. These clearances expire on September 30, 2021.
Comments must be filed by July 16, 2021.
Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the
Carole Reynolds or Stephanie Rosenthal, Attorneys, Division of Financial Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3224.
The four regulations covered by this notice are:
(1) Regulations promulgated under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. 1691
(2) Regulations promulgated under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. 1693
(3) Regulations promulgated under the Consumer Leasing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1667
(4) Regulations promulgated under the Truth-In-Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. 1601
As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, the FTC and the CFPB generally share the authority to enforce Regulations B, E, M, and Z for entities for which the FTC had enforcement authority before the Act, except for certain motor vehicle dealers.
Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FTC generally has sole authority to enforce Regulations B, E, M, and Z regarding certain motor vehicle dealers predominantly engaged in the sale and servicing of motor vehicles, the leasing and servicing of motor vehicles, or both, that, among other things, assign their contracts to unaffiliated third parties.
The regulations impose certain recordkeeping and disclosure requirements associated with providing credit or with other financial transactions. Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, Federal agencies must get OMB approval for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” includes agency requests or requirements to submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party.
All four of these regulations require covered entities to keep certain records, but FTC staff believes these records are kept in the normal course of business even absent the particular recordkeeping requirements.
The regulations also require covered entities to make disclosures to third parties. Related compliance involves set-up/monitoring and transaction-specific costs. “Set-up” burden, incurred only by covered new entrants, includes identifying the applicable required disclosures, determining how best to comply, and designing and developing compliance systems and procedures. “Monitoring” burden, incurred by all covered entities, includes their time and costs to review changes to regulatory requirements, make necessary revisions to compliance systems and procedures, and to monitor the ongoing operation of systems and procedures to ensure continued compliance. “Transaction-related” burden refers to the time and cost associated with providing the various required disclosures in individual transactions, thus, generally, of much lesser magnitude than “setup” and “monitoring” burden. The FTC's estimates of transaction time and volume are intended as averages. The population of affected motor vehicle dealers is one component of a much larger universe of such entities.
The required disclosures do not impose PRA burden on some covered entities because they make those disclosures in the normal course of business. For other covered entities that do not, their compliance burden will vary depending on the extent to which they have developed effective computer-based or electronic systems and procedures to communicate and document required disclosures.
The respondents included in the following burden calculations consist of, among others, credit and lease advertisers, creditors, owners (such as purchasers and assignees) of credit obligations, financial institutions, service providers, certain government agencies and others involved in delivering electronic fund transfers (“EFTs”) of government benefits, and lessors.
The cost estimates that follow relate solely to labor costs, and they include the time necessary to train employees how to comply with the regulations. Staff calculated labor costs by multiplying appropriate hourly wages by the burden hours described above. The hourly wages used were $60 for managerial oversight, $44 for skilled technical services, and $18 for clerical work. These figures are averages drawn from Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
The applicable PRA requirements impose minimal capital or other non-labor costs. Affected entities generally already have the necessary equipment for other business purposes. Similarly, FTC staff estimates that compliance with these rules entails minimal printing and copying costs beyond that associated with documenting financial transactions in the normal course of business.
The following discussion and tables present estimates under the PRA of recordkeeping and disclosure average time and labor costs, excluding that which FTC staff believes entities incur customarily in the normal course of business and information compiled and produced in response to FTC law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.
The ECOA prohibits discrimination in the extension of credit. Regulation B implements the ECOA, establishing disclosure requirements to assist customers in understanding their rights under the ECOA and recordkeeping requirements to assist agencies in enforcement. Regulation B applies to retailers, mortgage lenders, mortgage brokers, finance companies, and others.
FTC staff estimates that Regulation B's general recordkeeping requirements affect 530,762 credit firms subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, at an average annual burden of 1.25 hours per firm for a total of 663,453 hours. Staff also estimates that the requirement that mortgage creditors monitor information about race/national origin, sex, age, and marital status imposes a maximum burden of one minute each (of skilled technical time) for approximately 2.6 million credit applications (based on industry data regarding the approximate number of mortgage purchase and refinance originations), for a total of 43,333 hours.
Regulation B requires that creditors (
The EFTA requires that covered entities provide consumers with accurate disclosure of the costs, terms, and rights relating to EFT and certain other services. Regulation E implements the EFTA, establishing disclosure and other requirements to aid consumers and recordkeeping requirements to assist agencies with enforcement. It applies to financial institutions, retailers, gift card issuers and others that provide gift cards, service providers, various federal and state agencies offering EFTs, prepaid account entities, etc. Staff estimates that Regulation E's recordkeeping requirements affect 251,053 firms offering EFT and certain other services to consumers and that are subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, at an average annual burden of one hour per firm, for a total of 251,053 hours. Burden estimates relating to the disclosures required under Regulation E and labor cost estimates are provided in the tables below.
The CLA requires that covered entities provide consumers with accurate disclosure of the costs and terms of leases. Regulation M implements the CLA, establishing disclosure requirements to help consumers comparison shop and understand the terms of leases and recordkeeping requirements. It applies to vehicle lessors (such as auto dealers, independent leasing companies, and manufacturers' captive finance companies), computer lessors (such as computer dealers and other retailers), furniture lessors, various electronic commerce lessors, diverse types of lease
The TILA was enacted to foster comparison credit shopping and informed credit decisionmaking by requiring creditors and others to provide accurate disclosures regarding the costs and terms of credit to consumers. Regulation Z implements the TILA, establishing disclosure requirements to assist consumers and recordkeeping requirements to assist agencies with enforcement. These requirements pertain to open-end and closed-end credit and apply to various types of entities, including mortgage companies; finance companies; auto dealerships; private education loan companies; merchants who extend credit for goods or services; credit advertisers; acquirers of mortgages; and others. Additional requirements also exist in the mortgage area, including for high cost mortgages, higher-priced mortgage loans,
Pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC invites comments on: (1) Whether the disclosure requirements are necessary, including whether the information will be practically useful; (2) the accuracy of our burden estimates, including whether the methodology and assumptions used are useful; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of providing the required information to consumers.
You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before July 16, 2021. Write “Regs BEMZ, PRA Comments, P084812” on your comment. Your comment, including your name and your state, will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including the
Because of the public health emergency in response to the COVID-19 outbreak and the agency's heightened security screening, postal mail addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay. We strongly encourage
If you file your comment on paper, write “Regs BEMZ, PRA Comments, P084812” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580; or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, please submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.
Because your comment will be placed on
Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. Your comment will be kept confidential only if the FTC General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on
The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before July 16, 2021. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice with comment period.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces the opening of a docket to obtain comment on the systematic review draft report for Diagnosis and Treatment of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS). The draft report describes inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify relevant literature, outlines the approach for evaluating study quality, and summarizes the systematic review results. The report, once finalized, is intended to support the anticipated development of future clinical practice guidelines, which would guide physicians in managing and providing care for patients with ME/CFS. Currently there are no federal guidelines for management of ME/CFS. CDC has commissioned the Pacific Northwest Evidence-Based Practice Center at Oregon Health & Science University to conduct a systematic review of the publicly available scientific literature and now seeks public comment to inform the final report. In particular, CDC seeks data and information, including reports and manuscripts that are pending publications or are not available through indexed bibliographic databases. Access to pertinent scientific information from research and evidence-based clinical practice may be used to inform the final report. The anticipated CDC guideline would assist clinicians by outlining management practices for patients with ME/CFS.
Written comments must be received on or before August 16, 2021.May 17, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2021-0053 by either of the following methods:
•
•
For technical information on the systematic review report for ME/CFS, contact Anindita Issa, MD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop H24-12, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. Telephone: 404-718-3959; email:
Interested persons or organizations are invited to participate by submitting written views, recommendations, and data related to the draft report, including perspectives on and experiences with diagnosis and management of ME/CFS illness. In addition, CDC invites comments specifically on topics for pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatments.
Please note that comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and are subject to public disclosure. Comments will be posted on
CDC has commissioned the Pacific Northwest Evidence-Based Practice Center at Oregon Health and Science University to conduct a systematic review of the publicly available scientific literature for ME/CFS (systematic review). Once finalized, the systematic review report is intended to support the anticipated development of future agency clinical practice guidelines. The anticipated CDC guideline would assist physicians and other clinicians by outlining management practices for caring for patients with ME/CFS.
Public comment may inform the final systematic review report and may be used to inform development of a clinical guideline and related materials, which would help clinicians diagnose and treat patients with ME/CFS.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
On May 28, 2010, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) guidance
Comments must be received by June 1, 2021.
When commenting, please reference the applicable form number (see below) and the OMB control number (0938-1148). To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:
1.
2.
CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: CMS-10398 (#71)/OMB control number: 0938-1148, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may access CMS' website at
William N. Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Following is a summary of the use and burden associated with the subject information collection(s). More detailed information can be found in the collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see
1.
Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) proposes to extend data collection under the existing overarching Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (OMB #0970-0401). There are no changes to the proposed types of information collection or uses of data, but ACF is requesting an increase to the estimated number of respondents.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
In order to work continuously to ensure that the ACF programs are effective and meet our customers' needs, we use this Fast Track generic clearance process to collect qualitative feedback on our service delivery. This collection of information is necessary to enable ACF to garner customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner in accord with our commitment to improving service delivery. The information collected from our customers and stakeholders helps ensure that users have an effective, efficient, and satisfying experience with the programs. This feedback provides insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences, and expectations; provides an early warning of issues with service; or focus attention on areas where communication, training, or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections allow for ongoing, collaborative, and actionable communications between ACF and its customers and stakeholders. They also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.
Per Memorandum M-11-26, information collection requests submitted under this Fast Track generic will be considered approved unless OMB notifies ACF otherwise within 5 days.
Based on the use of this generic clearance over the past 3 years, ACF is requesting an increase to the estimated burden based on use over the past three years.
Social Security Act, Sec. 1110. [42 U.S.C. 1310].
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice of Supplemental Award.
HRSA announces the award of a supplement in the amount of $175,000 for a HRSA-funded cooperative agreement awarded to the University of Southern Maine Rural Health Research Center. The supplement will fund a comprehensive region wide assessment of health issues to improve health care in rural areas of the Northern Border Region (NBR) of the U.S.—Grant Number U1CRH03716.
For further information regarding this request, please contact Jennifer Burges via email at
In fiscal year 2021 departmental appropriations report language, HRSA's Federal Office of Rural Health Policy was directed to fund programs to assist the NBR, which is comprised of the States of Vermont, Maine, New York and New Hampshire. As part of that directive, HRSA intends to work in consultation with the Northern Border Region Commission to fund one RHRC to do a comprehensive region wide assessment of health, health outcomes, health needs, and health assets for the purpose of improving health care in rural areas within the NBR. The only RHRC positioned to do this work is the University of Southern Maine. It is the only RHRC that is located within the NBR states that has the capability to research regional rural health care needs and has experience working with the required data from these states. The proposed activities are within the scope of their current RHRC grant.
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
HRSA is publishing this notice of petitions received under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, as amended. While the Secretary of HHS is named as the respondent in all proceedings brought by the filing of petitions for compensation under the Program, the United States Court of Federal Claims is charged by statute with responsibility for considering and acting upon the petitions.
For information about requirements for filing petitions, and the Program in general, contact Lisa L. Reyes, Clerk of Court, United States Court of Federal Claims, 717 Madison Place NW, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 357-6400. For information on HRSA's role in the Program, contact the Director, National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 08N146B, Rockville, Maryland 20857; (301) 443-6593, or visit our website at:
The Program provides a system of no-fault compensation for certain individuals who have been injured by specified childhood vaccines. Subtitle 2 of Title XXI of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10
A petition may be filed with respect to injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths resulting from vaccines described in the Vaccine Injury Table (the Table) set forth at 42 CFR 100.3. This Table lists for each covered childhood vaccine the conditions that may lead to compensation and, for each condition, the time period for occurrence of the first symptom or manifestation of onset or of significant aggravation after vaccine administration. Compensation may also be awarded for conditions not listed in the Table and for conditions that are manifested outside the time periods specified in the Table, but only if the
Section 2112(b)(2) of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-12(b)(2), requires that “[w]ithin 30 days after the Secretary receives service of any petition filed under section 2111 the Secretary shall publish notice of such petition in the
Section 2112(b)(2) also provides that the special master “shall afford all interested persons an opportunity to submit relevant, written information” relating to the following:
1. The existence of evidence “that there is not a preponderance of the evidence that the illness, disability, injury, condition, or death described in the petition is due to factors unrelated to the administration of the vaccine described in the petition,” and
2. Any allegation in a petition that the petitioner either:
a. “[S]ustained, or had significantly aggravated, any illness, disability, injury, or condition not set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table but which was caused by” one of the vaccines referred to in the Table, or
b. “[S]ustained, or had significantly aggravated, any illness, disability, injury, or condition set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table the first symptom or manifestation of the onset or significant aggravation of which did not occur within the time period set forth in the Table but which was caused by a vaccine” referred to in the Table.
In accordance with Section 2112(b)(2), all interested persons may submit written information relevant to the issues described above in the case of the petitions listed below. Any person choosing to do so should file an original and three copies of the information with the Clerk of the United States Court of Federal Claims at the address listed above (under the heading
Office of the Secretary, HHS.
Notice.
In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.
Comments on the ICR must be received on or before June 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Sherrette Funn,
Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
This Request for Information (RFI) is intended to gather broad public input to assist the National Eye Institute (NEI), National Institutes of Health (NIH) in reviewing the draft strategic plan document accessible from the NEI Strategic Plan website. NEI invites input from vison researchers in academia and industry, health care professionals, patient advocates and advocacy organizations, scientific or professional organizations, federal agencies, and other interested members of the public. Organizations are strongly encouraged to submit a single response that reflects the views of their organization and their membership as a whole.
This Request for Information is open for public comment and must be received by June 7, 2021 to ensure consideration.
Comments must be submitted electronically at
Please direct all inquiries to
Charged to protect and preserve the eyes and vision of the American people, NEI supports basic and clinical research that unravels the mysteries of how vision works at a fundamental level and provides patients with new therapies and standards of care that maintain and improve quality of life.
In accordance with the 21st Century Cures Act, NIH institutes are required to regularly update their strategic plans. The new NEI Strategic Plan seeks to distill those reflections into a cohesive document that will guide efforts to address those gaps and opportunities over the next five years. NEI has always been—and will continue to be—committed to high quality investigator-initiated research and will fund the best science across the broad spectrum of vision research. Ultimately, NEI stakeholders provide the catalyst for identifying and implementing the goals.
NEI has been incorporating broad public and expert input in the development of this plan, starting in the winter of 2019-2020 with an initial Request for Information (RFI). This public comment period engaged perspectives from scientists, clinicians, patients, vision advocates, and the public. NEI received a robust response to the RFI, which informed the selection and agendas of expert panels for seven cross-cutting areas of emphasis during the spring and summer of 2020. NEI incorporated the topics covered in the RFI and panels into the planning document and presented the information publicly before the NAEC.
Under each area of emphasis, NEI provides a summary of goals related to research needs, gaps, and opportunities for the institute to address over the next five years.
This RFI invites comments from researchers in academia and industry, health care professionals, patient advocates and health advocacy organizations, scientific or professional organizations, federal agencies, and other interested members of the public on the draft NEI Strategic Plan at
Results of this RFI and updated Strategic Plan will be presented at the June 11, 2021, meeting of the NAEC and the finalized Strategic Plan will be posted on the NEI website once it is approved.
Responses to this RFI are voluntary. Please do not include any personally identifiable information or any information that you do not wish to make public. Proprietary, classified, confidential, or sensitive information should not be included in your response. The Government will use the information submitted in response to this RFI at its discretion. The Government reserves the right to use any submitted information on public websites, in reports, in summaries of the state of the science, in any possible resultant solicitation(s), grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s), or in the development of future funding opportunity announcements. This RFI is for informational and planning purposes only and is not a solicitation for applications or an obligation on the part of the Government to provide support for any ideas identified in response to it. Please note that the Government will not pay for the preparation of any information submitted or for use of that information.
NEI encourages the dissemination of this RFI opportunity to broader networks and is looking forward to receiving input from the community. Please provide a written response to
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.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Notice of availability; request for comment.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of the Draft Recovery Plan for Five Species from American Samoa. The draft recovery plan includes specific goals, objectives, and criteria necessary to remove these species from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. We request review of this draft recovery plan and invite comments from local, Territorial, and Federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.
To ensure consideration, we must receive written comments on or before August 16, 2021. However, we will accept information about the species at any time.
1.
2.
Megan Laut, Recovery Coordinator, at the above U.S. mail address, or by telephone at (808) 792-9400. Individuals who are hearing impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 for TTY assistance.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of the Draft Recovery Plan for Five Species from American Samoa. This recovery plan addresses recovery of one mammal (South Pacific subspecies of Pacific sheath-tailed bat or peapea vai [
Recovery of endangered or threatened animals and plants to the point where they are again secure, self-sustaining members of their ecosystems is a primary goal of our endangered species program and the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531
The purpose of a recovery plan is to provide a feasible and effective roadmap for a species' recovery, with the goal of improving its status and managing its threats to the point at which protections under the ESA are no longer needed. Recovery plans must be designed so that all stakeholders and the public understand the rationale behind the recovery program, whether they were involved in writing the plan or not, and recognize their role in its implementation. We are requesting submission of any information that enhances the necessary understanding of the species' biology and threats and its recovery needs and related implementation issues or concerns, to ensure that we have assembled, considered, and incorporated the best available scientific and commercial information into the draft recovery plan.
Recovery plans provide important guidance to the Service, States, other partners, and the public on methods of minimizing threats to listed species and objectives against which to measure the progress towards recovery; they are guidance and not regulatory documents. A recovery plan identifies, organizes, and prioritizes recovery actions and is an important guide that ensures sound scientific decision-making throughout the recovery process, which can take decades.
The recovery criteria established in a recovery plan (such as those proposed in this draft recovery plan) will serve as an indicator that a review of the species' status is advisable. We may consider downlisting, or if appropriate, removal from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife following a five-factor threats analysis in accordance with section 4(a)(1) of the ESA.
The draft recovery plan recommends a combination of recovery actions including biosecurity measures; control of introduced predators including rats, cats and invertebrates; forest habitat protection; species surveys and research; and translocation to additional islands.
Section 4(f) of the ESA requires us to provide public notice and an opportunity for public review and comment during recovery plan development. It is also our policy to request peer review of recovery plans (July 1, 1994; 59 FR 34270). Substantive comments may or may not result in changes to the recovery plan. Comments regarding recovery plan implementation will be forwarded, as appropriate, to Federal or other entities so they can be taken into account during the course of implementing recovery actions. Responses to individual commenter will not be provided. However, we will provide a summary of how we addressed substantive comments in an appendix to the approved recovery plan.
We invite written comments on the draft recovery plan. In particular, we are interested in additional information regarding the current threats to the species, ongoing beneficial management efforts, and the costs associated with implementing the recommended recovery actions.
All comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of the administrative record and will be available to the public. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—will be publicly available. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee we will be able to do so.
The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1533 (f)).
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 37) granting complainants' motion for return of bonds posted by Timeless Designs Import LLC (“Timeless Designs”) on behalf of respondent Jiangsu Divine Building Technology Development Co. Ltd. (“Divine”) during the period of Presidential review. The bonds at issue are hereby returned to Timeless Designs.
Lynde Herzbach, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3228. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
On May 16, 2019, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Mohawk Industries, Inc. of Calhoun, Georgia; Flooring Industries Ltd. Sarl of Bertrange, Luxembourg; and IVC US Inc. of Dalton, Georgia (collectively, “Complainants”). 84 FR 22161 (May 16, 2019). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain luxury vinyl tiles by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,200,460; 10,208,490; and 10,233,655 (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”).
On May 15, 2020, the presiding ALJ issued an ID granting a motion for summary determination of a violation of section 337. On September 16, 2020, the Commission affirmed the ID's finding of a violation. Comm'n Op. at 19-20 (Sept. 16, 2020); Order No. 36 (May 15, 2020). The Commission issued a general exclusion order (“GEO”) with respect to the Asserted Patents.
On January 27, 2021, Complainants filed a motion for the return of bonds posted by Timeless Designs on behalf of Divine pursuant to the GEO during the presidential review period based on a settlement agreement between Complainants and Divine. Timeless Designs is Divine's customer. On February 10, 2021, Complainants filed a supplement to the pending motion to include a redacted copy of the settlement agreement referenced therein between Complainants and Divine. On February 11, 2021, OUII filed a response supporting the motion as supplemented.
On March 26, 2021, the ALJ issued the subject ID, which grants Complainants' motion for the return of bonds pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(d)(1) (19 CFR 210.50(d)(1)). Order No. 37 (Mar. 26, 2021). The ID notes that the presidential review period expired on November 16, 2020, and the motion, as supplemented, was filed on February 10, 2021, within 90 days of the expiration of the presidential review period.
No party petitioned for review of the subject ID.
The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The bonds at issue are hereby ordered to be returned to Timeless Designs.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on May 12, 2021.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
Office on Violence Against Women, Department of Justice.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until July 16, 2021.
Written comments and/or suggestion regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to Cathy Poston, Office on Violence Against Women, at 202-514-5430 or
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Deputy Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E, 405B, Washington, DC 20530.
Office of the Chief Information Officer, Department of Justice.
30-Day notice.
The Office of the Chief Information Officer, Department of Justice, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until June 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
Office on Violence Against Women, Department of Justice.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until July 16, 2021.
Written comments and/or suggestion regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to Cathy Poston, Office on Violence Against Women, at 202-514-5430 or
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, the 206th open meeting of the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans (also known as the ERISA Advisory Council) will be held via a teleconference on Thursday, June 24 and Friday, June 25, 2021.
The two-day meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and end at approximately 5:30 p.m. (ET) each day with a one-hour break for lunch. The purpose of the open meeting is for Advisory Council members to hear testimony from invited witnesses and to receive an update from the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA).
The Advisory Council will study the following topics: (1) Gaps in Retirement Savings Based on Race, Ethnicity and Gender, and (2) Understanding Brokerage Window Prevalence, Usage, and Implementation. Descriptions of these topics, once finalized, will be available on the ERISA Advisory Council's web page at
The agenda and instructions for public access to the teleconference meeting will be available on the ERISA Advisory Council's web page at
Organizations or members of the public wishing to submit a written statement may do so on or before Thursday, June 17, 2021, to Christine Donahue, Executive Secretary, ERISA Advisory Council. Statements should be transmitted electronically as an email attachment in text or pdf format to
Individuals or representatives of organizations wishing to address the ERISA Advisory Council should forward their requests to the Executive Secretary on or before Thursday, June 17, 2021, via email to
Individuals who need special accommodations should contact the Executive Secretary on or before Thursday, June 17, 2021, via email to
For more information about the meeting, contact the Executive Secretary at the address or telephone number above.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) (44 U.S.C. 3501
Rule 9b-1 (17 CFR 240.9b-1) sets forth the categories of information required to be disclosed in an options disclosure document (“ODD”) and requires the options markets to file an ODD with the Commission 60 days prior to the date it is distributed to investors. In addition, Rule 9b-1 provides that the ODD must be amended if the information in the document becomes materially inaccurate or incomplete and that amendments must be filed with the Commission 30 days prior to the distribution to customers. Finally, Rule 9b-1 requires a broker-dealer to furnish to each customer an ODD and any amendments prior to accepting an order to purchase or sell an option on behalf of that customer or when approving a customer's account for options trading.
There are 16 options markets
In addition, approximately 1,020 broker-dealers
The total time burden for all respondents under this rule (both options markets and broker-dealers) is approximately 1,710 hours per year (384 + 1,326), and the total internal cost of compliance is approximately $244,818 per year ($161,280 + $83,538).
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following website:
On March 25, 2021, ICE Clear Credit LLC (“ICC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”)
ICC proposes revising its Rules and Exercise Procedures related to the clearing of Index Swaptions.
The proposed amendments consist of minor revisions to Rule 26R-319, which addresses procedures for settlement of an exercised Index Swaption.
Regarding iTraxx Index Swaptions, ICC proposes to amend Rule 26R-319(c), which applies in the case of a relevant M(M)R Restructuring Credit Event, which is when the restructuring of debt constitutes a credit event that triggers a CDS contract. Minor streamlining revisions to the exercise process rules include the proposed omission of paragraph (i) related to the delivery of MP Notices by Swaption Buyer and Swaption Sellers. Further, ICC does not propose any changes to paragraph (ii), which details how an Underlying New Trade comes into effect. An Underlying New Trade remains defined in Rule 26R-102 as a new single name CDS trade that would arise upon exercise of an Index Swaption where a relevant Restructuring Credit Event, if applicable, has occurred with respect to a reference entity in the relevant index. ICC also proposes to amend paragraph (iii) and remove paragraph (iv) which currently discuss the treatment of the Underlying New Trade in respect of the Event Determination Date. Instead, amended paragraph (iii) would discuss the treatment of the Underlying New Trade depending on whether the expiration date occurred prior to, or on or following, the commencement of the Credit Event Notice Triggering Period (as defined in the Restructuring Procedures). If the expiration date occurs prior to commencement of the period, the Underlying New Trade will be subject to the provisions of the CDS Restructuring Rules in Subchapter 26E (and may become a Triggered Restructuring CDS Transaction thereunder). If the Expiration Date occurs on or following commencement of such period, neither party will be permitted to deliver an MP Notice, the Underlying New Trade cannot become a Triggered Restructuring CDS Transaction and no Event Determination Date or settlement will occur.
The Exercise Procedures supplement the provisions of Subchapter 26R of the Rules with respect to Index Swaptions and provide further detail as to the manner in which Index Swaptions may be exercised by Swaption Buyers, the manner in which ICC will assign such exercises to Swaption Sellers, and certain actions that ICC may take in the event of technical issues.
The proposal would enhance the exercise and assignment process in the Exercise Procedures. Specifically, the proposal would revise the definition of Pre-Exercise Notification Period in Paragraph 1 to reference Paragraph 2.2(e) in respect of the Pre-Exercise Notification Period. Paragraph 2.2(e) describes the Pre-Exercise Notification Period during which an exercising party can submit, modify, and/or withdraw preliminary exercise notices. The Exercise Procedures allow firms to submit preliminary exercise notices such that the preliminary instructions can be used as the final exercise instructions in the event of a communications failure during the exercise window. The proposed changes would allow ICC to identify each exercising party's “in the money” Index Option open positions for the relevant expiration date and submit, on behalf of the exercising party, preliminary exercise notices for all such in “the money” positions. Such preliminary exercise notices submitted by ICC for an exercising party may be modified or withdrawn by the exercising party during the Pre-Exercise Notification Period. Additionally, the proposal would make a related change to Paragraph 2.2(i) to reference ICC's ability to submit, on behalf of an exercising party, a preliminary exercise notice.
The proposal would also update Paragraphs 2.6 and 2.8, which include procedures to address a failure of the electronic system established by ICC for exercise. In such case, Paragraph 2.6 provides ICC with several options including, canceling and rescheduling the Exercise Period (
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the organization.
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that the rules of ICC be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions, to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of ICC or for which it is responsible, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
As discussed above, the proposed rule change would make minor revisions to the Rules for settlement of an exercised Index Swaption. Specifically, the proposal would revise Rule 26R-319(b)(ii) to remove the description of the Additional Accrual in the determination of Index Swaption settlement amounts. The Commission believes this minor revision helps to simplify ICC's settlement rules with respect to settlement of Index Swaptions, for which the Additional Accrual will be zero, which could make it easier to understand the potential Index Swaption settlement amounts easier, thereby promoting the prompt
Additionally, the proposal would amend ICC's Rules to omit and revise certain other information. Specifically, the proposal would amend Rule 26R-319(c), which applies in the case of a relevant M(M)R Restructuring Credit Event, by omitting a paragraph (i) related to the delivery of MP Notices by Swaption Buyers and Sellers, and removing paragraph (iv), which currently discusses the treatment of the Underlying New Trade in respect of the Event Determination Date. Instead, the proposed language in paragraph (iii) would discuss the treatment of the Underlying New Trade depending on whether the expiration date occurred prior to, or on or following, the commencement of the CEN Triggering Period. If the expiration date occurs prior to commencement of the period, the Underlying New Trade will be subject to the provisions of the CDS Restructuring Rules in Subchapter 26E. If the Expiration Date occurs on or following commencement of such period, neither party will be permitted to deliver an MP Notice, the Underlying New Trade cannot become a Triggered Restructuring CDS Transaction and no Event Determination Date or settlement will occur. The Commission believes that this proposed revision will ensure that only trades meeting the timing of the triggering period will be settled. This, in turn, promotes accurate clearance and settlement during specified periods as well as assuring the safeguarding of securities or funds in ICC's custody or control or for which it is responsible by ensuring only appropriate securities and funds are exchanged.
Further, as noted above, the Exercise Procedures supplement the provisions of Subchapter 26R of the Rules with respect to Index Swaptions and provide further detail as to the manner in which Index Swaptions may be exercised by Swaption Buyers, the manner in which ICC will assign such exercises to Swaption Sellers, and certain actions that ICC may take in the event of technical issues. First, the definition of Pre-Exercise Notification Period has been revised to include a reference to Paragraph 2.2(e), which itself describes the Pre-Exercise Notification Period during which an exercising party can submit, modify, and/or withdraw preliminary exercise notices such that the preliminary instructions can be used as the final exercise instructions in the event of a communications failure during the exercise window. The Commission believes that this proposed change enhances the definition of this term by cross-referencing a more complete description of this period. Additionally, the proposal would revise Paragraph 2.2(e), which would allow ICC to identify each exercising party's “in the money” Index Option open positions for the relevant expiration date and submit, on behalf of the exercising party, preliminary exercise notices for all such “in the money” positions. Further, such preliminary exercise notices submitted by ICC for an exercising party may be modified or withdrawn by the exercising party during the Pre-Exercise Notification Period. Additionally, the proposal would make a related change to Paragraph 2.2(i) to reference ICC's ability to submit, on behalf of an exercising party, a preliminary exercise notice. The Commission believes that these proposed changes to the procedures related to the pre-exercise notification period would enhance the procedures by clarifying ICC's role in identifying each Exercising Party's “in the money” Index Option Open Positions for the relevant Expiration Date and submitting preliminary notices. The Commission believes that this should help the preliminary notification process operate smoothly and ensure that the preliminary instructions can be used as the final exercise instructions in the event of a communications failure during the exercise window, thereby increasing reliability of the process and helping to ensure prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities upon the exercise of Index Swaptions.
The proposed rule change would further revise the Exercise Procedures to account for the Pre-Exercise Notification Period during a systems failure. Specifically, as noted above, paragraph 2.6 provides ICC with several options including canceling and rescheduling the Exercise Period in the event of an exercise systems failure. The proposed changes would clarify that canceling and rescheduling the Exercise Period may include scheduling a new Pre-Exercise Notification Period, in which case any preliminary exercise notices and exercise notices submitted prior will be ineffective. The Commission believes that this proposed change would enhance the procedures by ensuring that pre-notifications do not result in erroneous exercises when there is a systems failure, thereby aiming to ensure accurate settlement and the safeguarding of securities and funds.
Paragraph 2.8 of the Exercise Procedures addresses the situation in which ICC will automatically exercise on the expiration date each open position in an Index Swaption that is determined by ICC to be “in the money” on such date. As noted above, the Exercise Procedures would be amended to include additional language in this paragraph relating to its determination of whether an Index Swaption is “in the money.” The Commission believes that this proposed change ensures that each of ICC's cleared products are appropriately and accurately exercised when there has been a systems failure, which in turn supports ICC's ability to promptly and accurately clear and settle securities transactions and safeguard securities and funds in its custody or control.
For the reasons stated above, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change should promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in ICC's custody and control or for which it is responsible, consistent with the Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) requires that ICC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for a well-founded, clear, transparent, and enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its activities in all relevant jurisdictions.
Further, the Commission believes that in proposing changes to the procedures related to the pre-exercise notification period clarifying ICC's role in identifying each Exercising Party's “in the money” Index Option Open Positions for the relevant Expiration Date and submitting preliminary notices, the procedures would provide a clear basis for the use of the preliminary instructions such as the final exercise instructions in the event of a communications failure during the exercise window.
For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).
Rules 17Ad-22(e)(17)(i) and (ii) require that ICC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to, as applicable, manage its operational risks by (i) identifying the plausible sources of operational risk, both internal and external, and mitigating their impact through the use of appropriate systems, policies, procedures, and controls, and (ii) ensuring that systems have a high degree of security, resiliency, operational reliability, and adequate, scalable capacity.
For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(17)(i) and (ii).
On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act, and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend Phlx Rules at Options 2, Section 4, Obligations of Market Makers; Options 4, Section 8, Long-Term Options Contracts; Options 4A, Section 6, Position Limits; Options 4A, Section 12, Terms of Index Options Contracts; and Options 4C, Section 5, Series of U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Options Contracts Open for Trading. The Exchange also proposes a technical amendment within Equity 11, Section 4, Payment on Delivery—Collect on Delivery.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 2, Section 4, Obligations of Market Makers; Options 4, Section 8, Long-Term Options Contracts; Options 4A, Section 6, Position Limits; Options 4A, Section 12, Terms of Index Options Contracts; and Options 4C, Section 5, Series of U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Options Contracts Open for Trading.
The Exchange also proposes a technical amendment within Equity 11, Section 4, Payment on Delivery—Collect on Delivery.
Phlx Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) describes the bid/ask differentials for long-term options series for equity options, exchange-traded products, indexes, and U.S. dollar-settled foreign currencies, respectively. Currently, the bid/ask differentials shall not apply to such options series until the time to expiration is less than nine (9) months for equity options and exchange-traded products as provided for within Options 4, Section 8(a). Currently, bid/ask differentials shall not apply to such options series until the time to expiration is less than twelve (12) months for index options as provided for within Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2). Currently, bid/ask differentials shall not apply to such options series until the time to expiration is less than nine (9) months for U.S. dollar-settled foreign currency options as provided for within Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C).
The Exchange proposes to centralize the bid/ask differentials from Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) within Options 2, Section 4(c)(1)(A) and add a sentence to the aforementioned rules that cites to Options 2, Section 4(b)(4)(i) for information on bid/ask differentials for the various products. The Exchange believes that this relocation will provide Primary Market Makers and Competitive Market Makers with centralized information regarding their bid/ask differential requirements.
The Exchange proposes to remove references to SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index within Options 4A, Section 6(b)(i) and Supplementary Material to Options 4A, Section 12. The SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index has not been listed by Phlx since 2016. The Exchange also proposes to remove a reference to the SIG Energy MLP Index
The Exchange proposes to add the title, “Supplementary Material to Equity 11, Section 4” within Equity 11, Section 4 and renumber the rule text that follows which includes defined terms. The Exchange also proposes to correct a lettering issue within the rule. These amendments are non-substantive and intended solely to make the rule easier to read.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) to relocate text concerning bid/ask differentials for long-term option series is consistent with the Act. The Exchange's proposal will centralize the bid/ask differentials within Options 2, Section 4(c)(1)(A) and add a sentence to Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) that cites to Options 2, Section 4(c)(1)(A) for information on bid/ask differentials for the various products. The Exchange believes that this relocation will provide Lead Market Makers and Market Makers with centralized information regarding their bid/ask differential requirements.
The Exchange's proposal to remove references to SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index within Options 4A, Section 6(b)(i) and Supplementary Material to Options 4A, Section 12 and to remove a reference to the SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index within Supplementary Material to Options 4A, Section 12 is consistent with the Act. These listing have not appeared on Phlx for several years.
The Exchange's proposal to add the title, “Supplementary Material to Equity 11, Section 4” within Equity 11, Section 4 and renumber and re-letter rule text are non-substantive and intended solely to make the rule easier to read.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) to relocate text concerning bid/ask differentials for long-term option series does not impose an undue burden on competition. The Exchange's proposal will centralize the bid/ask differentials within Options 2, Section 4(c)(1)(A) and add a sentence to Options 4, Section 8(a), Options 4A, Section 12(b)(2) and Options 4C, Section 5(a)(1)(C) that cites to Options 2, Section 4(c)(1)(A) for information on bid/ask differentials for the various products.
The Exchange's proposal to remove references to SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index within Options 4A, Section 6(b)(i) and Supplementary Material to Options 4A, Section 12 and to remove a reference to the SIG Oil Exploration & Production Index within Supplementary Material to Options 4A, Section 12 does not impose an undue burden on competition. These listing have not appeared on Phlx for several years.
The Exchange's proposal to add the title, “Supplementary Material to Equity 11, Section 4” within Equity 11, Section 4 and renumber and re-letter rule text are non-substantive and intended solely to make the rule easier to read.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend BX Rules at Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, and Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend BX's Rules at Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to describe Size Limitation and note its application to Opening Only Orders and Immediate-or-Cancel Orders within Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) and (2), respectively. Also, technical changes are proposed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) which describes the Specialized Quote Feed or “SQF”.
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) to describe within its rules a current limitation that exists today as to number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. Specifically, the maximum number of contracts, which shall not be less than 10,000, is established by the Exchange from time-to-time. Orders or quotes that exceed the maximum number of contracts are rejected. This System limitation is the same on all Nasdaq affiliated exchanges.
The Exchange also proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) which describes an Opening Only or “OPG” order. Today, an OPG order can only be executed in the Opening Process pursuant to Options 3, Section 8. The rule currently states that this order type is not subject to any protections listed
Similarly, the Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(2) which describes an Immediate-or-Cancel Order or “IOC” order. Today, the Exchange describes an IOC order as a Market Order or Limit Order to be executed in whole or in part upon receipt. Any portion not so executed is cancelled.
The Exchange notes that while only orders are entered into FIX, SQF is a quote protocol which also permits BX Options Market Makers to enter IOC orders that do not rest on the order book. The Exchange has not elected to utilize Size Limitation on SQF orders as it did for FIX because BX Options Market Makers only utilize SQF to enter IOC orders and BX Options Market Makers are professional traders with their own risk settings. FIX, on the other hand, is utilized by all market participants who may not have their own risk settings, unlike BX Options Market Makers.
BX Options Market Makers utilize IOC orders to trade out of accumulated positions and manage their risk when providing liquidity on the Exchange. Proper risk management, including using these IOC orders to offload risk, is vital for BX Options Market Makers, and allows them to maintain tight markets and meet their quoting and other obligations to the market. BX Options Market Makers handle a large amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections required by the Exchange, BX Options Market Makers utilize their own risk management parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of a BX Options Market Maker's erroneous order from being entered. The Exchange believes that BX Options Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk when submitting IOC orders through SQF and should be permitted to elect this method of order entry to obtain efficiency and speed of order entry, particularly in light of the continuous quoting obligations the Exchange imposes on these participants.
The Exchange believes that allowing BX Options Market Makers to submit IOC orders through their preferred protocol increases their efficiency in submitting such orders and thereby allows them to maintain quality markets to the benefit of all market participants that trade on the Exchange. Further, unlike other market participants, BX Options Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
The Exchange proposes to amend the description of a Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an
The Exchange also proposes to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) that states, “Immediate-or-Cancel Orders entered into SQF are not subject to the Order Price Protection or the Market Order Spread Protection in Options 3, Section 15(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively.” This sentence is duplicative of information contained within Options 3, Section 7(b)(2)(B), which the Exchange is amending in this proposal. The Exchange proposes to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) as the information is contained elsewhere.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) is consistent with the Act. The proposed amendment is intended to describe a current limitation that exists today as to the number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. Specifically, the maximum number of contracts, which shall not be less than 10,000, is established by the Exchange from time-to-time. Orders or quotes that exceed the maximum number of contracts are rejected. This System limitation is the same on all Nasdaq affiliated exchanges.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) to make clear that Size Limitation applies to OPG orders is consistent with the Act as this rule text will clarify the existing language and make clear that Size Limitation is applicable to this order type. OPG orders are entered during the Opening Process utilizing FIX.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7 with respect to IOC orders is consistent with the Act. Today, the Exchange describes an IOC Order as a Market Order or Limit Order to be executed in whole or in part upon receipt. Any portion not so executed is cancelled.
The Exchange notes that while only orders are entered into FIX, SQF is a quote protocol which also permits BX Options Market Makers to enter IOC orders that do not rest on the order book. The Exchange has not elected to utilize Size Limitation on SQF orders as it did for FIX because BX Options Market Makers only utilize SQF to enter IOC orders and BX Options Market Makers are professional traders with their own risk settings. FIX, on the other hand, is utilized by all market participants who unlike BX Options Market Makers may not have their own risk settings. BX Options Market Makers utilize IOC orders to trade out of accumulated positions and manage their risk when providing liquidity on the Exchange. Proper risk management, including using these IOC orders to offload risk, is vital for BX Options Market Makers, and allows them to maintain tight markets and meet their quoting and other obligations to the market. BX Options Market Makers handle a large amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections required by the Exchange. BX Options Market Makers utilize their own risk management parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of a BX Options Market Maker's erroneous order from being entered. The Exchange believes that BX Options Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk when submitting IOC orders through SQF and should be permitted to elect this method of order entry to obtain efficiency and speed of order entry, particularly in light of the continuous quoting obligations the Exchange imposes on these participants.
The Exchange believes that allowing BX Options Market Makers to submit IOC orders through their preferred protocol increases their efficiency in submitting such orders and thereby allows them to maintain quality markets to the benefit of all market participants that trade on the Exchange. Further, unlike other market participants, BX Options Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
The Exchange's proposal to amend the description of Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an
The Exchange's proposal to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) that states, “Immediate-or-Cancel Orders entered into SQF are not subject to the Order Price Protection or the Market Order Spread Protection in Options 3, Section 15(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively” is consistent with the Act. This sentence is duplicative of information contained within Options 3, Section 7(b)(2)(B), which the Exchange is amending in this proposal. The Exchange proposes to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) as the information is contained elsewhere.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) does not impose an undue burden on competition. The proposed amendment is intended to describe a current limitation that exists today as to the number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. This System limitation is the same on all Nasdaq affiliated exchanges.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) to make clear that Size Limitation applies to OPG orders does not impose an undue burden on competition as this rule text will clarify the existing language and make clear that Size Limitation is applicable to this order type. OPG orders are entered during the Opening Process utilizing FIX.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7 with respect to IOC orders does not impose an undue burden on competition. With the proposed addition of Size Limitation to proposed new Options 3, Section 15(b)(2), the Exchange also proposes to note that the Size Limitation does not apply to IOC orders entered through SQF. Unlike other market participants, BX Options Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
The Exchange's proposal to amend the description of Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an
The Exchange's proposal to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) that states, “Immediate-or-Cancel Orders entered into SQF are not subject to the Order Price Protection or the Market Order Spread Protection in Options 3, Section 15(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively” does not impose an undue burden on competition. This sentence is duplicative of information contained within Options 3, Section 7(b)(2)(B), which the Exchange is amending in this proposal. The Exchange proposes to remove the final sentence of Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) as the information is contained elsewhere.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that other exchanges have substantively similar rules regarding size limitation for certain incoming orders or quotes.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
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.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (“NOM”) Rules at Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, and Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend NOM's Rules at Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to describe Size Limitation. The Exchange also proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, to: (1) Remove the One-Cancels-the-Other Order; (2) indicate the risk protections that are applicable to On the Open Orders and Immediate or Cancel orders; and (3) remove references to an outdated OTTO protocol; and (4) make technical corrections. The Exchange also proposes to update a rule citation within General 1, Section 1, Definitions, and add and reserve certain sections within the Equity Rules. Each change is described below.
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) to describe within its rules a current limitation that exists today as to the number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. Specifically, the maximum number of contracts, which shall not be
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, to (1) remove the “One-Cancels-the-Other Order” order type; (2) indicate the risk protections that are applicable to On the Open Orders or “OPG” orders and Immediate or Cancel orders; (3) remove references to an outdated OTTO protocol; and (4) make technical corrections.
The Exchange proposes to remove the “One-Cancels-the-Other Order” currently located within Options 3, Section 7(a)(8). A One-Cancels-the-Other Order is an order entered by a Market Maker that consists of a buy order and a sell order treated as a unit; the full execution of one of the orders causes the other to be canceled. This order type was adopted in 2011
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) which describes an On the Open Order or “OPG” order. Today, an OPG order can only be executed in the Opening Cross pursuant to Options 3, Section 8. Further, if after entry into the System, the order is not fully executed in its entirety during the Opening Cross, the order, or any unexecuted portion of such order, will be cancelled back to the entering participant. OPG orders may not route. OPG orders are entered during the Opening Cross utilizing “Financial Information eXchange” or “FIX”.
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(2) which describes an Immediate-or-Cancel Order or “IOC” order. Today, the Exchange describes an IOC order as a Market Order or Limit Order to be executed in whole or in part upon receipt. Any portion not so executed is cancelled and/or routed pursuant to the Participant's instruction.
The Exchange also proposes to note, similar to Phlx and BX, that an IOC order entered by a Market Maker through Specialized Quote Feed or “SQF”
The Exchange notes that while only orders are entered into FIX, SQF is a quote protocol which also permits Market Makers to enter IOC orders that do not rest on the order book. The Exchange has not elected to utilize Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread Protection, and Size Limitation on SQF orders, as it did for FIX, because Market Makers only utilize SQF to enter IOC orders and Market Makers are professional traders with their own risk
Market Makers utilize IOC orders to trade out of accumulated positions and manage their risk when providing liquidity on the Exchange. Proper risk management, including using these IOC orders to offload risk, is vital for Market Makers, and allows them to maintain tight markets and meet their quoting and other obligations to the market. Market Makers handle a large amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections required by the Exchange, Market Makers utilize their own risk management parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of a Market Maker's erroneous order from being entered. The Exchange believes that Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk when submitting IOC orders through SQF and should be permitted to elect this method of order entry to obtain efficiency and speed of order entry, particularly in light of the continuous quoting obligations the Exchange imposes on these participants.
The Exchange believes that allowing Market Makers to submit IOC orders through their preferred protocol increases their efficiency in submitting such orders and thereby allows them to maintain quality markets to the benefit of all market participants that trade on the Exchange. Further, unlike other market participants, Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
The Exchange proposes to amend the description of Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an e.g to conform the punctuation in the paragraph.
The Exchange proposes to update a rule citation within General 1, Section 1 to Options 3, Section 20. The rule text currently cites Options 3, Section 4, but that citation was incorrectly updated in a prior rule change.
Nasdaq proposes to amend the Rulebook shell to add a new Equity 3A and Equity 8A and reserve those sections. Equity 3A will be utilized by BX Rulebook and the Exchange proposes to reserve that section in this Rulebook to demonstrate the section does not exist for the Nasdaq equity market.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) is consistent with the Act. The proposed amendment is intended to describe a current limitation that exists today as to the number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. Specifically, the maximum number of contracts, which shall not be less than 10,000, is established by the Exchange from time-to-time. Orders or quotes that exceed the maximum number of contracts are rejected. This System limitation is the same on all Nasdaq affiliated exchanges.
The Exchange's proposal to remove the “One-Cancels-the-Other Order” currently located within Options 3, Section 7(a)(8) is consistent with the Act. This order type was adopted in 2011
The Exchange's proposal to amend OPG orders within Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) to make clear that OPG orders are currently not subject to any protections listed in Options 3, Section 15 describing risk protections,
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(2) and (b)(3), which describes IOC orders and DAY orders, to remove outdated citations to OTTO within Options 3, Section 7 that were inadvertently not removed is consistent with the Act. These amendments are non-substantive and will add clarity to these rules.
The Exchange's proposal to note, similar to Phlx and BX, that an IOC order entered by a Market Maker through SQF is not subject to certain risk protections noted within Options 3, Section 15 is consistent with the Act. Today, an IOC order entered through SQF is not subject to the Order Price Protection or Market Order Spread Protections noted within Options 3, Section 15(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively. Further, with the addition of Size Limitation to proposed new Options 3, Section 15(b)(2), the Exchange also proposes to note that SQF orders are not subject to Size Limitation. The addition of this rule text will bring greater clarity to the order type.
The Exchange notes that while only orders are entered into FIX, SQF is a quote protocol which also permits Market Makers to enter IOC orders that do not rest on the order book. The Exchange has not elected to utilize Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread Protection, and Size Limitation on SQF orders, as it did for FIX, because Market Makers only utilize SQF to enter IOC orders and Market Makers are professional traders with their own risk settings. FIX, on the other hand, is utilized by all market participants who may not have their own risk settings, unlike Market Makers.
Market Makers utilize IOC orders to trade out of accumulated positions and manage their risk when providing liquidity on the Exchange. Proper risk management, including using these IOC orders to offload risk, is vital for Market Makers, and allows them to maintain tight markets and meet their quoting and other obligations to the market. Market Makers handle a large amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections required by the Exchange, Market Makers utilize their own risk management parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of a Market Maker's erroneous order from being entered. The Exchange believes that Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk when submitting IOC orders through SQF and should be permitted to elect this method of order entry to obtain efficiency and speed of order entry, particularly in light of the continuous quoting obligations the Exchange imposes on these participants.
The Exchange believes that allowing Market Makers to submit IOC orders through their preferred protocol increases their efficiency in submitting such orders and thereby allows them to maintain quality markets to the benefit of all market participants that trade on the Exchange. Further, unlike other market participants, Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
Finally, the Exchange's proposal to amend the description of Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an e.g to conform the punctuation in the paragraph is consistent with the Act. These changes are non-substantive.
The Exchange's proposal to update an incorrect rule citation within General 1, Section 1 to Options 3, Section 20 is consistent with the Act. The rule text currently cites Options 3, Section 4, but that citation was incorrectly updated in a prior rule change.
Nasdaq's proposal to amend the Rulebook shell to add a new Equity 3A and Equity 8A and reserve those sections is consistent with the Act. Equity 3A will be utilized by the BX Rulebook and the Exchange proposes to reserve that section in this Rulebook to demonstrate the section does not exist for the Nasdaq equity market.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 15, Risk Protections, to add a new section (b)(2) does not impose an undue burden on competition. The proposed amendment is intended to describe a current limitation that exists today as to the number of contracts an incoming order or quote may specify. This System limitation is the same on all Nasdaq affiliated exchanges.
The Exchange's proposal to remove the “One-Cancels-the-Other Order” currently located within Options 3, Section 7(a)(8) does not impose an undue burden on competition. No Participant was able to utilize this order type on NOM's System to date. The Exchange's proposal to remove the order type will make clear that the order type is not available. Further, the order type was intended to permit Market Makers to submit a two-sided order consisting of both a bid and an offer. Today, Market Makers may submit two-sided quotes utilizing NOM's SQF
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(1) to make clear that Size Limitation applies to OPG orders and the remainder of the risk protections noted within Options 3, Section 15 do not apply to OPG orders does not impose an undue burden on competition. The proposed rule text will clarify the manner in which risk protections interact with this order type. The Opening Cross itself has boundaries within which orders will be executed. Any participant may enter an Opening Only Order. Typically Market Makers submit Valid Width NBBOs, as provided for within Options 3, Section 8, during the Opening Cross.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7(b)(2) and (b)(3),
The Exchange's proposal to note, similar to Phlx and BX, that an IOC order entered by a Market Maker through SQF is not subject to certain risk protections noted within Options 3, Section 15 does not impose an undue burden on competition. Today, an IOC order entered through SQF is not subject to the Order Price Protection or Market Order Spread Protections noted within Options 3, Section 15(a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively. Further, with the addition of Size Limitation to proposed new Options 3, Section 15(b)(2), the Exchange also proposes to note that SQF orders are not subject to Size Limitation. The addition of this rule text will bring greater clarity to the order type.
The Exchange notes that while only orders are entered into FIX, SQF is a quote protocol which also permits Market Makers to enter IOC orders that do not rest on the order book. The Exchange has not elected to utilize Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread Protection, and Size Limitation on SQF orders, as it did for FIX, because Market Makers only utilize SQF to enter IOC orders and Market Makers are professional traders with their own risk settings. FIX, on the other hand, is utilized by all market participants who may not have their own risk settings, unlike Market Makers.
The Exchange believes that Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk when submitting IOC orders through SQF and should be permitted to elect this method of order entry to obtain efficiency and speed of order entry, particularly in light of the continuous quoting obligations the Exchange imposes on these participants. Further, unlike other market participants, Market Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations.
Finally, the Exchange's proposal to amend the description of Specialized Quote Feed within Options 3, Section 7(e)(1)(B) to make plural the word “request” and also add an “.,” after an e.g to conform the punctuation in the paragraph does not impose an undue burden on competition. These changes are non-substantive.
The Exchange's proposal to update an incorrect rule citation within General 1, Section 1 to Options 3, Section 20 does not impose an undue burden on competition. The rule text currently cites Options 3, Section 4, but that citation was incorrectly updated in a prior rule change.
Nasdaq's proposal to amend the Rulebook shell to add a new Equity 3A and Equity 8A and reserve those sections does not impose an undue burden on competition. Equity 3A will be utilized by the BX Rulebook and the Exchange proposes to reserve that section in this Rulebook to demonstrate the section does not exist for the Nasdaq equity market.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that other exchanges have substantively similar rules regarding size limitation for certain incoming orders or quotes.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
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.
2 p.m. on Thursday, May 20, 2021.
The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
This meeting will be closed to the public.
Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.
In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at
The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the following topics:
At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.
For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Rule 34b-1 under the Investment Company Act (17 CFR 270.34b-1) governs sales material that accompanies or follows the delivery of a statutory prospectus (“sales literature”). Rule 34b-1 deems to be materially misleading any investment company (“fund”) sales literature required to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) by Section 24(b) of the Investment Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-24(b)) that includes performance data, unless the sales literature also includes the appropriate uniformly computed data and the legend disclosure required in investment company advertisements by rule 482 under the Securities Act of 1933 (17 CFR 230.482). Requiring the inclusion of such standardized performance data in sales literature is designed to prevent misleading performance claims by funds and to enable investors to make meaningful comparisons among funds.
The Commission estimates that on average approximately 351 respondents file 7,362
The collection of information under rule 34b-1 is mandatory. The information provided under rule 34b-1 is not kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following website:
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).
Notice.
: Notice of an application for an order under section 17(d) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) and rule 17d-1 under the Act permitting certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited by section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act. Applicants request an order to permit certain closed-end investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each other and with affiliated investment funds and accounts.
: Delaware Wilshire Private Markets Master Fund (“Master Fund”); Delaware Wilshire Private Markets Fund (“Feeder Fund A”); Delaware Wilshire Private Markets Tender Fund (“Feeder Fund T”); Delaware Management Company, a series of Macquarie Investment Management Business Trust (“Macquarie”, on behalf of itself and its successors
The application was filed on April 2, 2020, and amended on November 13, 2020, March 30, 2021 and May 6, 2021.
: An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's Secretary at
The Commission:
Barbara T. Heussler, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6990, or Trace W. Rakestraw, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6825 (Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).
The following is a summary of the application. The complete 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
1. Master Fund is a Delaware statutory trust and is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company registered under the Act. Master Fund's Objectives and Strategies
2. Each of Feeder Fund A and Feeder Fund T is a Delaware statutory trust and is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company registered under the Act. Each of Feeder Fund A's and Feeder Fund T's Objectives and Strategies are to provide efficient access to the private markets with the goals of offering long-term capital appreciation and current income by investing substantially all of their assets in the Master Fund. Each of Feeder Fund A and Feeder Fund T has a board of trustees, the majority of which are Non-Interested Trustees. No Non-Interested Trustee will have any direct or indirect financial interest in any Co-Investment Transaction or any interest in any portfolio company, other than indirectly through share ownership (if any) in Feeder Fund A, Feeder Fund T, Master Fund or a Future Regulated Fund.
3. The Existing Affiliated Funds are investment funds each of which would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act. The investment adviser to the Existing Affiliated Funds is Wilshire.
4. Macquarie is a series of a Delaware statutory trust and registered with the Commission as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”). Macquarie serves as the investment adviser to the
5. Wilshire, a California corporation, is an investment adviser registered with the Commission under the Advisers Act. Wilshire identifies investment opportunities and executes on trading strategies for the Existing Regulated Funds subject to investment guidelines agreed to by Macquarie and Wilshire. Macquarie has established guidelines, monitoring and reporting procedures to evaluate the performance of Wilshire but is not responsible for making or ratifying any investment decisions made by Wilshire. Macquarie is not an affiliated person (as defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Act) of Wilshire.
6. Applicants seek an order (“Order”) to permit one or more Regulated Funds
7. Applicants state that Macquarie has delegated responsibility for the Co-Investment Program to Wilshire. Applicants further state that Wilshire has sole responsibility for causing the Regulated Funds and any Affiliated Fund to enter into a Potential Co-Investment Transaction and is responsible for ensuring that the Wilshire Advisers, the Regulated Funds, and any Affiliated Funds comply with the conditions of the application.
8. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time, form one or more Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiaries.
9. When considering Potential Co-Investment Transactions for any Regulated Fund, the applicable Adviser will consider only the Objectives and Strategies, investment policies, investment positions, capital available for investment (“Available Capital”), and other pertinent factors applicable to that Regulated Fund. Each Adviser, as applicable, undertakes to perform these duties consistently for each Regulated Fund, as applicable, regardless of which of them serves as investment adviser for these entities. The participation of a Regulated Fund in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction may only be approved by both a majority of the trustees of the Board who have no financial interest in such transaction, plan or arrangement and a majority of such trustees who are Non-Interested Trustees (a “Required Majority”),
10. Other than pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as provided in conditions 7 and 8, and after making the determinations required in conditions 1 and 2(a), the Regulated Fund's Adviser will present each Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the proposed allocation to the Regulated Fund's Eligible Trustees, and the Required Majority will approve each Co-Investment Transaction prior to any investment by the participating Regulated Fund.
11. With respect to the pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments provided in conditions 7 and 8, a Regulated Fund may participate in a pro rata disposition or Follow-On Investment without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if, among other things: (i) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund in such disposition is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer immediately preceding the disposition or Follow-On Investment, as the case may be; and (ii) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved that Regulated Fund's participation in pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund. If the Board does not so approve, any such disposition or Follow-On Investment will be submitted to the Regulated Fund's Eligible Trustees. The Board of any Regulated Fund may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval of pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments with the result that all dispositions and/or Follow-On Investments must be submitted to the Eligible Trustees.
12. Applicants state that if an Adviser or its principals, or any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with an Adviser or its principals, and any Affiliated Fund (collectively, the “Holders”) own in the aggregate more than 25% of the outstanding voting shares of a Regulated Fund (the “Shares”), then the Holders will vote such Shares as required under condition 14.
1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit affiliated persons of a registered investment company from participating in joint transactions with the company unless the Commission has granted an order permitting such transactions. In passing upon applications under rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the company's participation in the joint transaction is consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and the extent to which such participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of other participants.
2. Applicants state that in the absence of the requested relief, the Regulated Funds would be, in some circumstances, limited in their ability to participate in attractive and appropriate investment opportunities. Applicants believe that the proposed terms and conditions will ensure that the Co-Investment Transactions are consistent with the protection of each Regulated Fund's shareholders and with the purposes intended by the policies and provisions of the Act. Applicants state that the Regulated Funds' participation in the Co-Investment Transactions will be consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and on a basis that is not different from or less advantageous than that of other participants.
Applicants agree that the Order shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. Each time an Adviser considers a Potential Co-Investment Transaction for an Affiliated Fund or another Regulated Fund that falls within a Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies, the Regulated Fund's Adviser will make an independent determination of the appropriateness of the investment for the Regulated Fund in light of the Regulated Fund's then-current circumstances.
2. (a) If the Adviser deems a Regulated Fund's participation in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be appropriate for the Regulated Fund, it will then determine an appropriate level of investment for the Regulated Fund.
(b) If the aggregate amount recommended by the applicable Adviser to be invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, together with the amount proposed to be invested by the other participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds, collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity, the investment opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on each participant's Available Capital, up to the amount proposed to be invested by each. The applicable Adviser will provide the Eligible Trustees of each participating Regulated Fund with information concerning each participating party's Available Capital to assist the Eligible Trustees with their review of the Regulated Fund's investments for compliance with these allocation procedures.
(c) After making the determinations required in conditions 1 and 2(a), the applicable Adviser will distribute written information concerning the Potential Co-Investment Transaction (including the amount proposed to be invested by each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund) to the Eligible Trustees of each participating Regulated Fund for their consideration. A Regulated Fund will co-invest with one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated Funds only if, prior to the Regulated Fund's participation in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, a Required Majority concludes that:
(i) The terms of the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, including the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Regulated Fund and its shareholders and do not involve overreaching in respect of the Regulated Fund or its shareholders on the part of any person concerned;
(ii) the Potential Co-Investment Transaction is consistent with:
(A) The interests of the Regulated Fund's shareholders; and
(B) the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;
(iii) the investment by any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds would not disadvantage the Regulated Fund, and participation by the Regulated Fund would not be on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds; provided that if any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds, but not the Regulated Fund itself, gains the right to nominate a director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors or the right to have a board observer or any similar right to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company, such event shall not be interpreted to prohibit the Required Majority from reaching the conclusions required by this condition (2)(c)(iii), if:
(A) The Eligible Trustees will have the right to ratify the selection of such director or board observer, if any;
(B) the applicable Adviser agrees to, and does, provide periodic reports to the Regulated Fund's Board with respect to the actions of such director or the information received by such board observer or obtained through the exercise of any similar right to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company; and
(C) any fees or other compensation that any Affiliated Fund or any Regulated Fund or any affiliated person
(iv) the proposed investment by the Regulated Fund will not benefit the Advisers, any Affiliated Funds or other Regulated Funds or any affiliated person of any of them (other than the parties to the Co-Investment Transaction), except (A) to the extent permitted by condition 13, (B) to the extent permitted by section 17(e) of the Act, as applicable, (C) indirectly, as a result of an interest in the securities issued by one of the parties to the Co-Investment Transaction, or (D) in the case of fees or other compensation described in condition 2(c)(iii)(C).
3. Each Regulated Fund has the right to decline to participate in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction or to invest less than the amount proposed.
4. The applicable Adviser will present to the Board of each Regulated Fund, on a quarterly basis, a record of all investments in Potential Co-Investment Transactions made by any of the other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds during the preceding quarter that fell within the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies that were not made available to the Regulated Fund, and an explanation of why the investment opportunities were not offered to the Regulated Fund. All information presented to the Board pursuant to this condition will be kept for the life of the Regulated Fund and at least two years thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the Commission and its staff.
5. Except for Follow-On Investments made in accordance with condition 8,
6. A Regulated Fund will not participate in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction unless the terms, conditions, price, class of securities to be purchased, settlement date, and registration rights will be the same for each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund. The grant to an Affiliated Fund or another Regulated Fund, but not the Regulated Fund, of the right to nominate a director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have an observer on the board of directors or similar rights to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company will not be interpreted so as to violate this condition 6, if conditions 2(c)(iii)(A), (B) and (C) are met.
7.
(a) If any Affiliated Fund or any Regulated Fund elects to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of an interest in a security that was acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Adviser will:
(i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-Investment Transaction of the proposed disposition at the earliest practical time; and
(ii) formulate a recommendation as to participation by each Regulated Fund in the disposition.
(b) Each Regulated Fund will have the right to participate in such disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same terms and conditions as those applicable to the participating Affiliated Funds and Regulated Funds.
(c) A Regulated Fund may participate in such disposition without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund in such disposition is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer immediately preceding the disposition; (ii) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in such dispositions on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application); and (iii) the Board of the Regulated Fund is provided on a quarterly basis with a list of all dispositions made in accordance with this condition. In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Trustees, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such disposition solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
(d) Each Affiliated Fund and each Regulated Fund will bear its own expenses in connection with any such disposition.
8.
(a) If any Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund desires to make a Follow-On Investment in a portfolio company whose securities were acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Adviser will:
(i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the co-investment transaction of the proposed Follow-On Investment at the earliest practical time; and
(ii) formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation, including the amount of the proposed Follow-On Investment, by each Regulated Fund.
(b) A Regulated Fund may participate in such Follow-On Investment without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund in such investment is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and (ii) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in Follow-On Investments on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application). In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Trustees, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Follow-On Investment solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
(c) If, with respect to any Follow-On Investment:
(i) The amount of the opportunity is not based on the Regulated Funds' and the Affiliated Funds' outstanding investments immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and
(ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the applicable Wilshire Adviser to be invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Follow-On Investment, together with the amount proposed to be invested by other participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds, collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity, then the investment opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on each participant's Available Capital, up to the amount proposed to be invested by each.
(d) The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this condition will be considered a Co-
9. The Non-Interested Trustees of each Regulated Fund will be provided quarterly for review all information concerning Potential Co-Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions, including investments made by any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds that the Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, so that the Non-Interested Trustees may determine whether all investments made during the preceding quarter, including those investments that the Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with the conditions of the Order. In addition, the Non-Interested Trustees will consider at least annually the continued appropriateness for the Regulated Fund of participating in new and existing Co-Investment Transactions.
10. Each Regulated Fund will maintain the records required by section 57(f)(3) of the Act as if each of the Regulated Funds were a BDC and each of the investments permitted under these conditions were approved by the Required Majority under section 57(f) of the Act.
11. No Non-Interested Trustee of a Regulated Fund will also be a director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise an “affiliated person” (as defined in the Act) of an Affiliated Fund.
12. The expenses, if any, associated with acquiring, holding or disposing of any securities acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction (including, without limitation, the expenses of the distribution of any such securities registered for sale under the 1933 Act) will, to the extent not payable by the Advisers under their respective investment advisory agreements with Affiliated Funds and the Regulated Funds, be shared by the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds in proportion to the relative amounts of the securities held or to be acquired or disposed of, as the case may be.
13. Any transaction fee
14. If the Holders own in the aggregate more than 25% of the Shares of a Regulated Fund, then the Holders will vote such Shares in the same percentages as the Regulated Fund's other shareholders (not including the Holders) when voting on (1) the election of directors; (2) the removal of one or more directors; or (3) any other matter under either the Act or applicable state law affecting the Board's composition, size or manner of election.
15. Each Regulated Fund's chief compliance officer, as defined in rule 38a-1(a)(4) under the Act, will prepare an annual report for the Board of such Regulated Fund that evaluates (and documents the basis of that evaluation) the Regulated Fund's compliance with the terms and conditions of the application and procedures established to achieve such compliance.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to temporarily suspend publication on certain proprietary data feeds of last sale information on securities that are projected to exceed 98 percent of the maximum allowable value of the feed. The suspension will be effective on May 4, 2021, and will conclude on May 17, 2021, when the maximum allowable value of the feed will be substantially enhanced. The proposed suspension will impact the following data feeds: Nasdaq Last Sale and Nasdaq Last Sale Plus (Equity 7, Section 139), Nasdaq Basic (Equity 7, Section 147), and Nasdaq FilterView (Equity 7, Section 137).
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the
Nasdaq proposes to temporarily suspend, on an emergency basis, the publication on certain proprietary data feeds of last sale information on securities that are projected to exceed 98 percent of the maximum allowable value of the feed. The suspension will be effective on May 4, 2021, and will conclude on May 17, 2021, when the maximum allowable value of the feed will be substantially enhanced. The proposed suspension will impact the following data feeds: Nasdaq Last Sale and Nasdaq Last Sale Plus (Equity 7, Section 139), Nasdaq Basic (Equity 7, Section 147), and Nasdaq FilterView (Equity 7, Section 137).
The last sale data on the four data feeds listed above is currently written in a 4-byte hexadecimal computer code format, which establishes a maximum allowable value of $429,496.7926. If the price of a security meets the maximum allowable price, it resets to zero. Nasdaq plans to remove that maximum allowable price on May 17, 2021, by substituting the 4-byte hexadecimal format with an 8-byte hexadecimal format using a long-form trade message, eliminating the possibility that the price of any existing security will reset to zero. Until May 17, however, as a protective safeguard to prevent the dissemination of incorrect data, Nasdaq proposes to suspend reporting of any security that is projected to exceed 98 percent of the maximum allowable value of the feed ($420,906.856). This is a temporary measure that will have no permanent impact on any of the four data feeds listed above after the upgrade goes into effect on May 17, 2021.
Only one NMS security is projected to exceed 98 percent of the maximum allowable value between May 4 and May 17, 2021, based on intraday price movements observed on May 3, 2021.
The last sale data for any security not published on the Nasdaq proprietary data feeds will be available through the securities information processors.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The purpose of this proposal is to prevent the last sale price for any of the proprietary data feeds listed above from resetting to zero because a security has reached the maximum allowable value of $429,496.7926. Nasdaq believes that this protective safeguard will prevent the dissemination of incorrect data, and will thereby promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As explained above, the Proposal is a protective safeguard to prevent the dissemination of incorrect data. It will have no impact on intermarket competition (the competition among SROs) because this temporary measure will have no long-term impact on the competition among exchanges in the sale of top-of-book data. It will have no impact on intramarket competition (the competition among exchange customers) because no purchaser of the affected data feeds will be treated any differently than any other purchaser of the affected data feeds.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Options Market LLC (“BOX”) facility to establish a policy relating to billing errors. The text of the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's internet 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 these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend its Fee Schedule to establish a provision related to billing errors and fee disputes. More specifically, the Exchange would adopt language in Section VII.B of the BOX Fee Schedule (Fee Disputes) that would provide that all fees and rebates assessed prior to the three full calendar months before the month in which the Exchange becomes aware of a billing error shall be considered final. Particularly, the Exchange will resolve an error by crediting or debiting Participants and Non-Participants based on the fees or rebates that should have been applied in the three full calendar months preceding the month in which the Exchange became aware of the error, which includes all impacted transactions that occurred during those months.
The purpose of the proposed change is to encourage Participants and Non-Participants to promptly review their Exchange invoices so that any disputed charges can be addressed in a timely manner. The Exchange notes that it provides Participants with both daily and monthly fee reports and thus believes they should be aware of any potential billing errors within three months. Further, any fees assessed on Non-Participants are sent as monthly
The Exchange notes that the proposed change is similar to a policy currently in place at another exchange.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
The Exchange believes that providing that all fees and rebates are final after three months (
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change has any impact on competition. The proposed rule change would establish a clear process that would apply equally to all Participants. Additionally, the proposed rule change is similar to rules of another exchange. The Exchange does not believe such proposed changes would impair the ability of Participants or competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets. Moreover, because the proposed changes would apply equally to all Participants, the proposal does not impose any burden on competition.
The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay for this filing, so that the proposed rule change will become operative immediately. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it will allow the Exchange to modify the BOX Fee Schedule to adopt a provision related to billing errors and fee disputes that is designed to provide clarity and certainty with respect to when Exchange fees and rebates may be considered final. Further, the proposed rule change would allow BOX to adopt a billing policy that is similar in all material respects to provisions currently in effect on other national securities exchanges
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
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 January 22, 2021, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “BZX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”)
On March 24, 2021, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
The Commission approved a rule governing the listing and trading of shares (“Shares”) of the Funds,
The Exchange proposes to amend the rule applicable to the listing and trading of the Shares to allow each Fund to calculate and disseminate multiple intraday NAVs. The Exchange states that NAVs, which are used to value exchange-traded products (“ETPs”) such as Tracking Fund Shares,
In support of its proposal, the Exchange states that allowing the Funds to strike and publish multiple intraday NAVs would provide the marketplace with additional information related to each Fund's underlying holdings on an intraday basis, which the Exchange believes will allow market participants to better assess their risk and provide additional certainty around intraday price and hedging.
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,
The Commission has not previously approved a proposed rule change under Rule 19b-4 of the Act to permit the listing and trading of any ETP that calculates and disseminates multiple intraday NAVs.
1. As proposed, each Fund would be able to strike and disseminate multiple intraday NAVs. Do commenters have views regarding whether the calculation and dissemination of multiple intraday NAVs would be helpful or confusing to market participants, particularly in light of the other information, including intraday indicative value, which is disseminated regarding the Shares?
2. What effects, if any, would intraday creations and redemptions have on secondary trading and price discovery?
3. The Shares are listed and traded on the Exchange as Tracking Fund Shares. Accordingly, the Funds do not disclose on a daily basis the Funds' full portfolio holdings. Given the lack of full portfolio transparency on a daily basis, what issues, if any, do multiple, intraday NAVs pose? What, if any, benefits do they confer?
4. The proposal does not stipulate the number of intraday NAVs each Fund will strike and does not stipulate when such intraday NAVs would be struck. Do commenters have concerns regarding the lack of fixed number and times of proposed intraday NAVs? If so, what are those concerns?
Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the “burden to demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the self-regulatory organization [`SRO'] that proposed the rule change.”
For these reasons, the Commission believes it is appropriate to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine whether the proposal should be approved or disapproved.
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments regarding whether the proposal should be approved or disapproved by June 7, 2021. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by June 21, 2021. The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, which are set forth in the Notice, in addition to any other comments they may wish to submit about the proposed rule change.
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.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 2.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4587-DR), dated 02/24/2021.
Issued on 05/11/2021.
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 the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma, dated 02/24/2021, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:
All Contiguous Counties have been previously declared.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small Business Administration under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“Act”), under Section 309 of the Act and 13 CFR Section 107.1900 of the Small Business Administration Rules and Regulations to function as a small business investment company under the Small Business Investment Company License No. 02/02-0660 issued to GC SBIC V, L.P., said license is hereby declared null and void.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Request for public comments.
Notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request from the Town of Sanford ME, to dispose of 5.3 and .8 acres of land at Sanford Seacoast Regional Airport, Sanford, ME. The land is no longer needed for aviation purposes and may be disposed of by the airport. These parcels are located in non-aeronautical use area and will have no effect on any existing or future aviation development needs. The proceeds from the sale of the two properties will be placed in the airports operating and maintenance account.
Comments must be received on or before June 16, 2021.
You may send comments using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Interested persons may inspect the request and supporting documents by contacting the FAA at the address listed under
Mr. Jorge E. Panteli, Compliance and Land Use Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration New England Region Airports Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803. Telephone: 781-238-7618.
The FAA issues this notice under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2).
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below. Before submitting this ICR to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is soliciting public comment on specific aspects of the activities identified in the ICR.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before July 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR should be submitted on
Ms. Hodan Wells, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at email:
The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information collection activities before seeking OMB approval of the activities.
FRA believes that soliciting public comment may reduce the administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of information that Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA reasons that comments received will advance three objectives: (1) Reduce reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection requirements in a “user-friendly” format to improve the use of such information; and (3) accurately assess the resources expended to retrieve and produce information requested.
The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB clearance as the PRA requires:
Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that a respondent is not required to respond to, conduct, or sponsor a collection of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below. Before submitting this ICR to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is soliciting public comment on specific aspects of the activities identified below.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before July 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR should be submitted on
Ms. Kim Toone, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at email:
The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information collection activities before seeking OMB approval of the activities.
FRA believes that soliciting public comment may reduce the administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of information that Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA reasons that comments received will advance three objectives: (1) Reduce reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection requirements in a “user-friendly” format to improve the use of such information; and (3) accurately assess the resources expended to retrieve and produce information requested.
The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB clearance as the PRA requires:
Reporting Burden:
Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that a respondent is not required to respond to, conduct, or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its implementing regulations, this notice announces that FRA is forwarding the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the information collection and its expected burden. On February 18, 2021, FRA published a notice providing a 60-day period for public comment on the ICR.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before June 16, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Ms. Hodan Wells, Information Collection Clearance Officer at email:
The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve paperwork packages.
FRA received one comment in response to this 60-day notice from Dr. Dennis J. Fixler, the Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). In its March 11, 2021 letter to FRA, the BEA expresses its strong support for this ICR because BEA considers the data collected on FRA's forms to be crucial to key components of its economic statistics. The BEA uses the data collected to prepare estimates of the employee compensation component of national income and state personal income. The BEA specifically uses employee injury and death data collected on forms FRA F 6180.55 and FRA F 6180.55a, Railroad Injury and Illness Summary, to prepare estimates of workers' compensation for the railroad industry.
Before OMB decides whether to approve the proposed collection of information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. Federal law requires OMB to approve or disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30-day notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d);
Comments are invited on the following ICR regarding: (1) Whether the information collection activities are necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of the information collection activities, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to determine the estimates; (3) ways for FRA to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of information collection activities on the public, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB clearance as the PRA requires:
Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that a respondent is not required to respond to, conduct, or sponsor a collection of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
Notice and request for comments.
The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently the Bureau of the Fiscal Service within the Department of the Treasury is soliciting comments concerning the Schedule of Excess Risks.
Written comments should be received on or before July 16, 2021 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments and requests for additional information to Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Bruce A. Sharp, Room #4006-A, P.O. Box 1328, Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328, or
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
Notice.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
See Supplementary Information section for effective date(s).
OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.
The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (
On May 11, 2021, OFAC determined that the property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authority listed below.
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
Notice.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
See
OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.
The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (
On May 12, 2021, OFAC determined that the property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authority listed below.
1. GONZALEZ PENUELAS, Ignacio (Latin: GONZÁLEZ PEÑUELAS, Ignacio) (a.k.a. “GONZALEZ PENUELAS, Jose Ignacio”; a.k.a. “NACHO GONZALEZ”), Sinaloa, Mexico; DOB 31 Jul 1972; POB Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; C.U.R.P. GOPI720731HSLNXG07 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK] (Linked To: GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION). Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of the GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION, a foreign person identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Kingpin Act.
2. GONZALEZ PENUELAS, Jesus (Latin: GONZÁLEZ PEÑUELAS, Jesús) (a.k.a. “EL CHUY GONZALEZ”), Sinaloa, Mexico; DOB 10 Nov 1969; POB Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; C.U.R.P. GOPJ691110HSLNXS09 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK]. Identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to section 805(b)(1) of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (“Kingpin Act”), 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(1).
3. GONZALEZ PENUELAS, Wilfrido (Latin: GONZÁLEZ PEÑUELAS, Wilfrido) (a.k.a. GONZALEZ PENUELAS, Wilfredo (Latin: GONZÁLEZ PEÑUELAS, Wilfredo)), Avenida Segunda numero 148, del Poblado Gallo de Limones, Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico; DOB 14 Sep 1977; POB Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; C.U.R.P. GOPW770914HSLNXL03 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK] (Linked To: GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION). Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of the GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION, a foreign person identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Kingpin Act.
4. MENDIVIL FIGUEROA, Efrain, Sinaloa, Mexico; DOB 01 Feb 1980; POB Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; R.F.C. MEFE800201L2A (Mexico); C.U.R.P. MEFE800201HSLNGF04 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK]. Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of the GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION, a foreign person identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Kingpin Act.
5. NUNEZ MOLINA, Adelmo (Latin: NÚÑEZ MOLINA, Adelmo) (a.k.a. FLORES NUNEZ, Adelmo (Latin: FLORES NÚÑEZ, Adelmo)), Sinaloa, Mexico; DOB 15 Dec 1970; POB Choix, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; C.U.R.P. NUMA701215HSLXLD02 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK]. Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of Jesus GONZALEZ PENUELAS, a foreign person identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Kingpin Act.
6. PAYAN MERAZ, Juana, Mexico; DOB 08 Mar 1974; POB Badiraguato, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Female; C.U.R.P. PAMJ740308MSLYRN17 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK]. Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of Raul PAYAN MERAZ.
7. PAYAN MERAZ, Raul, Mexico; DOB 30 Jun 1975; POB Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; Gender Male; C.U.R.P. PAMR750630HSLYRL06 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK]. Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(2) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(2), for materially assisting in, or providing financial or technological support for or to, or providing goods or services in support of, the international narcotics trafficking activities of the GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION, a foreign person identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to the Kingpin Act.
1. CITY PLAZA, SOCIEDAD ANOMINA DE CAPITAL VARIABLE (a.k.a. CITY PLAZA, S.A. DE C.V.), Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico; Business Registration Document # CUD: A201903242035215924 (Mexico); Folio Mercantil No. N-2019028273 (Mexico) [SDNTK]. Designated pursuant to section 805(b)(3) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(3), for being owned, controlled, or directed by, or acting for or on behalf of, a foreign person designated pursuant to the Kingpin Act, Efrain Mendivil Figueroa.
2. GONZALEZ PENUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION (Latin: GONZÁLEZ PEÑUELAS DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATION), Sinaloa, Mexico [SDNTK]. Identified as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker pursuant to section 805(b)(1) of the Kingpin Act, 21 U.S.C. 1904(b)(1).
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
Notice.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets
See
OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.
The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (
On May 12, 2021, OFAC determined that the property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following person is unblocked and has been removed from the SDN List under the relevant sanctions authorities listed below.
1. ZAMBADA GARCIA, Jesus Reynaldo (a.k.a. “EL REY ZAMBADA”); DOB 13 Aug 1961; POB Culiacan, Sinaloa, Mexico; nationality Mexico; citizen Mexico; C.U.R.P. ZAGJ610813HSLMRS05 (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK].
Departmental Offices, U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Notice.
The Department of the Treasury will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. The public is invited to submit comments on this request.
Comments should be received on or before June 16, 2021 to be assured of consideration.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Copies of the submissions may be obtained from Spencer W. Clark by emailing
The CDFI Fund collects data from prospective NMTC Program applicants once per allocation round by means of an online NMTC Program Allocation Application (hereby, the Application or Applications). As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the CDFI Fund invited the general public and other federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collection for the calendar year (CY) 2021-2023 allocation rounds. In response to the request for comment, the CDFI Fund received 214 unique comments from 43 organizations. The NMTC Program Application was updated based upon the CDFI Fund's review and adjudication of the public comments.
Most changes were made to provide more clarity to intended users. The information collected will be used to select awardees, based on a merit-based selection process. The requested information is required by the NMTC Program Authorization (26 CFR 1.45D-1) and respective Notice of Allocation Availability.
44 U.S.C. 3501
May 20, 2021, 12 p.m. to 2 p.m., Eastern time.
This meeting will be accessible via conference call and via Zoom Meeting and Screenshare. Any interested person may call (i) 1-929-205-6099 (US Toll) or 1-669-900-6833 (US Toll) or (ii) 1-877-853-5247 (US Toll Free) or 1-888-788-0099 (US Toll Free), Meeting ID: 974 4919 4997, to listen and participate in this meeting. The website to participate via Zoom Meeting and Screenshare is
This meeting will be open to the public.
The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Finance Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement. The subject matter of this meeting will include:
The agenda will be available no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, May 12, 2021 at:
Elizabeth Leaman, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors, (617) 305-3783,
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Written comments and recommendations on the proposed collection of information should be received on or before July 16, 2021.
Submit written comments on the collection of information through Federal Docket Management System
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
Under the PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. This request for comment is being made pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA.
With respect to the following collection of information, VBA invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of VBA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of VBA'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 respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology.
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
This is a reinstatement only with no changes. The respondent burden has decreased due to the estimated number of receivables averaged over the past year.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary:
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
This is a reinstatement only, with no substantive changes, and the respondent burden has decreased.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise
This is a reinstatement only with no substantive changes. The respondent burden has not changed.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
The respondent burden has decreased due to the removal of one of the forms listed within this collection. VA Form 21-4140 has not been changed; this is a reinstatement only.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary.
(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement contract requirements and language for contracting with IT and OT service providers and recommend updates to such requirements and language to the FAR Council and other appropriate agencies. The recommendations shall include descriptions of contractors to be covered by the proposed contract language.
(c) The recommended contract language and requirements described in subsection (b) of this section shall be designed to ensure that:
(d) Within 90 days of receipt of the recommendations described in subsection (b) of this section, the FAR Council shall review the proposed contract language and conditions and, as appropriate, shall publish for public comment proposed updates to the FAR.
(e) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of OMB shall take appropriate steps to ensure to the greatest extent possible that service providers share data with agencies, CISA, and the FBI as may be necessary for the Federal Government to respond to cyber threats, incidents, and risks.
(f) It is the policy of the Federal Government that:
(g) To implement the policy set forth in subsection (f) of this section:
(A) the nature of cyber incidents that require reporting;
(B) the types of information regarding cyber incidents that require reporting to facilitate effective cyber incident response and remediation;
(C) appropriate and effective protections for privacy and civil liberties;
(D) the time periods within which contractors must report cyber incidents based on a graduated scale of severity, with reporting on the most severe cyber incidents not to exceed 3 days after initial detection;
(E) National Security Systems reporting requirements; and
(F) the type of contractors and associated service providers to be covered by the proposed contract language.
(h) Current cybersecurity requirements for unclassified system contracts are largely implemented through agency-specific policies and regulations, including cloud-service cybersecurity requirements. Standardizing common cybersecurity contractual requirements across agencies will streamline and improve compliance for vendors and the Federal Government.
(i) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense acting through the Director of the NSA, the Director of OMB, and the Administrator of General Services, shall review agency-specific cybersecurity requirements that currently exist as a matter of law, policy, or contract and recommend to the FAR Council standardized contract language for appropriate cybersecurity requirements. Such recommendations shall include consideration of the scope of contractors and associated service providers to be covered by the proposed contract language.
(j) Within 60 days of receiving the recommended contract language developed pursuant to subsection (i) of this section, the FAR Council shall review the recommended contract language and publish for public comment proposed updates to the FAR.
(k) Following any updates to the FAR made by the FAR Council after the public comment period described in subsection (j) of this section, agencies shall update their agency-specific cybersecurity requirements to remove any requirements that are duplicative of such FAR updates.
(l) The Director of OMB shall incorporate into the annual budget process a cost analysis of all recommendations developed under this section.
(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall:
(c) As agencies continue to use cloud technology, they shall do so in a coordinated, deliberate way that allows the Federal Government to prevent, detect, assess, and remediate cyber incidents. To facilitate this approach, the migration to cloud technology shall adopt Zero Trust Architecture, as practicable. The CISA shall modernize its current cybersecurity programs, services, and capabilities to be fully functional with cloud-computing environments with Zero Trust Architecture. The Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services acting through the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) within the General Services Administration, shall develop security principles governing Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) for incorporation into agency modernization efforts. To facilitate this work:
(d) Within 180 days of the date of this order, agencies shall adopt multi-factor authentication and encryption for data at rest and in transit, to the maximum extent consistent with Federal records laws and other applicable laws. To that end:
(e) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Director of the FBI, and the Administrator of General Services acting through the Director of FedRAMP, shall establish a framework to collaborate on cybersecurity and incident response activities related to FCEB cloud technology, in order to ensure effective information sharing among agencies and between agencies and CSPs.
(f) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of General Services, in consultation with the Director of OMB and the heads of other agencies as the Administrator of General Services deems appropriate, shall begin modernizing FedRAMP by:
(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST shall solicit input from the Federal Government, private sector, academia, and other appropriate actors to identify existing or develop new standards, tools, and best practices for complying with the standards, procedures, or criteria in subsection (e) of this section.
(c) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Director of NIST shall publish preliminary guidelines, based on the consultations described in subsection (b) of this section and drawing on existing documents as practicable, for enhancing software supply chain security and meeting the requirements of this section.
(d) Within 360 days of the date of this order, the Director of NIST shall publish additional guidelines that include procedures for periodic review and updating of the guidelines described in subsection (c) of this section.
(e) Within 90 days of publication of the preliminary guidelines pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in consultation with the heads of such agencies as the Director of NIST deems appropriate, shall issue guidance identifying practices that enhance the security of the software supply chain. Such guidance may incorporate the guidelines published pursuant to subsections (c) and (i) of this section. Such guidance shall include standards, procedures, or criteria regarding:
(A) using administratively separate build environments;
(B) auditing trust relationships;
(C) establishing multi-factor, risk-based authentication and conditional access across the enterprise;
(D) documenting and minimizing dependencies on enterprise products that are part of the environments used to develop, build, and edit software;
(E) employing encryption for data; and
(F) monitoring operations and alerts and responding to attempted and actual cyber incidents;
(f) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and the Administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, shall publish minimum elements for an SBOM.
(g) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Director of NIST, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense acting through the Director of the NSA, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, the Director of OMB, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall publish a definition of the term “critical software” for inclusion in the guidance issued pursuant to subsection (e) of this section. That definition shall reflect the level of privilege or access required to function, integration and dependencies with other software, direct access to networking and computing resources, performance of a function critical to trust, and potential for harm if compromised.
(h) Within 30 days of the publication of the definition required by subsection (g) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, shall identify and make available to agencies a list of categories of software and software products in use or in the acquisition process meeting the definition of critical software issued pursuant to subsection (g) of this section.
(i) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA and with the Director of OMB, shall publish guidance outlining security measures for critical software as defined in subsection (g) of this section, including applying practices of least privilege, network segmentation, and proper configuration.
(j) Within 30 days of the issuance of the guidance described in subsection (i) of this section, the Director of OMB acting through the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government within OMB shall take appropriate steps to require that agencies comply with such guidance.
(k) Within 30 days of issuance of the guidance described in subsection (e) of this section, the Director of OMB acting through the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government within OMB shall take appropriate steps to require that agencies comply with such guidelines with respect to software procured after the date of this order.
(l) Agencies may request an extension for complying with any requirements issued pursuant to subsection (k) of this section. Any such request shall be considered by the Director of OMB on a case-by-case basis, and only if accompanied by a plan for meeting the underlying requirements. The Director of OMB shall on a quarterly basis provide a report to the APNSA identifying and explaining all extensions granted.
(m) Agencies may request a waiver as to any requirements issued pursuant to subsection (k) of this section. Waivers shall be considered by the Director of OMB, in consultation with the APNSA, on a case-by-case basis, and shall be granted only in exceptional circumstances and for limited duration, and only if there is an accompanying plan for mitigating any potential risks.
(n) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of OMB, and the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government within OMB, shall recommend to the FAR Council contract language requiring suppliers of software available for purchase by agencies to comply with, and attest to complying with, any requirements issued pursuant to subsections (g) through (k) of this section.
(o) After receiving the recommendations described in subsection (n) of this section, the FAR Council shall review the recommendations and, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, amend the FAR.
(p) Following the issuance of any final rule amending the FAR as described in subsection (o) of this section, agencies shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, remove software products that do not meet the requirements of the amended FAR from all indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contracts; Federal Supply Schedules; Federal Government-wide Acquisition Contracts; Blanket Purchase Agreements; and Multiple Award Contracts.
(q) The Director of OMB, acting through the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government within OMB, shall require agencies employing software developed and procured prior to the date of this order (legacy software) either to comply with any requirements issued pursuant to subsection (k) of this section or to provide a plan outlining actions to remediate or meet those requirements, and shall further require agencies seeking renewals of software contracts, including legacy software, to comply with any requirements issued pursuant to subsection (k) of this section, unless an extension or waiver is granted in accordance with subsection (l) or (m) of this section.
(r) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense acting through the Director of the NSA, shall publish guidelines recommending minimum standards for vendors' testing of their software source code, including identifying recommended types of manual or automated testing (such as code review tools, static and dynamic analysis, software composition tools, and penetration testing).
(s) The Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in coordination with representatives of other agencies as the Director of NIST deems appropriate, shall initiate pilot programs informed by existing consumer product labeling programs to educate the public on the security capabilities of internet-of-Things (IoT) devices and software development practices, and shall consider ways to incentivize manufacturers and developers to participate in these programs.
(t) Within 270 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in coordination with the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and representatives of other agencies as the Director of NIST deems appropriate, shall identify IoT cybersecurity criteria for a consumer labeling program, and shall consider whether such a consumer labeling program may be operated in conjunction with or modeled after any similar existing government programs consistent with applicable law. The criteria shall reflect increasingly comprehensive levels of testing and assessment that a product may have undergone, and shall use or be compatible with existing labeling schemes that manufacturers use to inform consumers about the security of their products. The Director of NIST shall examine all relevant information, labeling, and incentive programs and employ best practices. This review shall focus on ease of use for consumers and a determination of what measures can be taken to maximize manufacturer participation.
(u) Within 270 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Director of NIST, in coordination with the Chair of the FTC and representatives from other agencies as the Director of NIST deems appropriate, shall identify secure software development practices or criteria for a consumer software labeling program, and shall consider whether such a consumer software labeling program may be operated in conjunction with or modeled after any similar existing government programs, consistent with applicable law. The criteria shall reflect a baseline level of secure practices, and if practicable, shall reflect increasingly comprehensive levels of testing and assessment that a product may have undergone. The Director
(v) These pilot programs shall be conducted in a manner consistent with OMB Circular A-119 and NIST Special Publication 2000-02 (Conformity Assessment Considerations for Federal Agencies).
(w) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Director of NIST shall conduct a review of the pilot programs, consult with the private sector and relevant agencies to assess the effectiveness of the programs, determine what improvements can be made going forward, and submit a summary report to the APNSA.
(x) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the heads of other agencies as the Secretary of Commerce deems appropriate, shall provide to the President, through the APNSA, a report that reviews the progress made under this section and outlines additional steps needed to secure the software supply chain.
(b) The Board shall review and assess, with respect to significant cyber incidents (as defined under Presidential Policy Directive 41 of July 26, 2016 (United States Cyber Incident Coordination) (PPD-41)) affecting FCEB Information Systems or non-Federal systems, threat activity, vulnerabilities, mitigation activities, and agency responses.
(c) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall convene the Board following a significant cyber incident triggering the establishment of a Cyber Unified Coordination Group (UCG) as provided by section V(B)(2) of PPD-41; at any time as directed by the President acting through the APNSA; or at any time the Secretary of Homeland Security deems necessary.
(d) The Board's initial review shall relate to the cyber activities that prompted the establishment of a UCG in December 2020, and the Board shall, within 90 days of the Board's establishment, provide recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security for improving cybersecurity and incident response practices, as outlined in subsection (i) of this section.
(e) The Board's membership shall include Federal officials and representatives from private-sector entities. The Board shall comprise representatives of the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, CISA, the NSA, and the FBI, as well as representatives from appropriate private-sector cybersecurity or software suppliers as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. A representative from OMB shall participate in Board activities when an incident under review involves FCEB Information Systems, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The Secretary of Homeland Security may invite the participation of others on a case-by-case basis depending on the nature of the incident under review.
(f) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall biennially designate a Chair and Deputy Chair of the Board from among the members of the Board, to include one Federal and one private-sector member.
(g) The Board shall protect sensitive law enforcement, operational, business, and other confidential information that has been shared with it, consistent with applicable law.
(h) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide to the President through the APNSA any advice, information, or recommendations of the Board for improving cybersecurity and incident response practices and policy upon completion of its review of an applicable incident.
(i) Within 30 days of completion of the initial review described in subsection (d) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide to the President through the APNSA the recommendations of the Board based on the initial review. These recommendations shall describe:
(j) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General and the APNSA, shall review the recommendations provided to the President through the APNSA pursuant to subsection (i) of this section and take steps to implement them as appropriate.
(k) Unless otherwise directed by the President, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall extend the life of the Board every 2 years as the Secretary of Homeland Security deems appropriate, pursuant to section 871 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
(b) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, in consultation with the Director of OMB, the Federal Chief Information Officers Council, and the Federal Chief Information Security Council, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense acting through the Director of the NSA, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall develop a standard set of operational procedures (playbook) to be used in planning and conducting a cybersecurity vulnerability and incident response activity respecting FCEB Information Systems. The playbook shall:
(c) The Director of OMB shall issue guidance on agency use of the playbook.
(d) Agencies with cybersecurity vulnerability or incident response procedures that deviate from the playbook may use such procedures only after consulting with the Director of OMB and the APNSA and demonstrating that these procedures meet or exceed the standards proposed in the playbook.
(e) The Director of CISA, in consultation with the Director of the NSA, shall review and update the playbook annually, and provide information to the Director of OMB for incorporation in guidance updates.
(f) To ensure comprehensiveness of incident response activities and build confidence that unauthorized cyber actors no longer have access to FCEB Information Systems, the playbook shall establish, consistent with applicable law, a requirement that the Director of CISA review and validate FCEB Agencies' incident response and remediation results upon an agency's completion of its incident response. The Director of CISA may recommend use of another agency or a third-party incident response team as appropriate.
(g) To ensure a common understanding of cyber incidents and the cybersecurity status of an agency, the playbook shall define key terms and use such terms consistently with any statutory definitions of those terms, to the extent practicable, thereby providing a shared lexicon among agencies using the playbook.
(b) FCEB Agencies shall deploy an Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) initiative to support proactive detection of cybersecurity incidents within Federal Government infrastructure, active cyber hunting, containment and remediation, and incident response.
(c) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA shall provide to the Director of OMB recommendations on options for implementing an EDR initiative, centrally located to support host-level visibility, attribution, and response regarding FCEB Information Systems.
(d) Within 90 days of receiving the recommendations described in subsection (c) of this section, the Director of OMB, in consultation with Secretary of Homeland Security, shall issue requirements for FCEB Agencies to adopt Federal Government-wide EDR approaches. Those requirements shall support a capability of the Secretary of Homeland Secretary, acting through the Director of CISA, to engage in cyber hunt, detection, and response activities.
(e) The Director of OMB shall work with the Secretary of Homeland Security and agency heads to ensure that agencies have adequate resources to comply with the requirements issued pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
(f) Defending FCEB Information Systems requires that the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA have access to agency data that are relevant to a threat and vulnerability analysis, as well as for assessment and threat-hunting purposes. Within 75 days of the date of this order, agencies shall establish or update Memoranda of Agreement (MOA) with CISA for the Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation Program to ensure object level data, as defined in the MOA, are available and accessible to CISA, consistent with applicable law.
(g) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Director of the NSA as the National Manager for National Security Systems (National Manager) shall recommend to the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) appropriate actions for improving detection of cyber incidents affecting National Security Systems, to the extent permitted by applicable law, including recommendations concerning EDR approaches and whether such measures should be operated by agencies or through a centralized service of common concern provided by the National Manager.
(h) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and the CNSS shall review the recommendations submitted under subsection (g) of this section and, as appropriate, establish policies that effectuate those recommendations, consistent with applicable law.
(i) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Director of CISA shall provide to the Director of OMB and the APNSA a report describing how authorities granted under section 1705 of Public Law 116-283, to conduct threat-hunting activities on FCEB networks without prior authorization from agencies, are being implemented. This report shall also recommend procedures to ensure that mission-critical systems are not disrupted, procedures for notifying system owners of vulnerable government systems, and the range of techniques that can be used during testing of FCEB Information Systems. The Director of CISA shall provide quarterly reports to the APNSA and the Director of OMB regarding actions taken under section 1705 of Public Law 116-283.
(j) To ensure alignment between Department of Defense Information Network (DODIN) directives and FCEB Information Systems directives, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of OMB, shall:
(b) Within 14 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government within OMB, shall provide to the Director of OMB recommendations on requirements for logging events and retaining other relevant data within an agency's systems and networks. Such recommendations shall include the types of logs to be maintained, the time periods to retain the logs and other relevant data, the time periods for agencies to enable recommended logging and security requirements, and how to protect logs. Logs shall be protected by cryptographic methods to ensure integrity once collected and periodically verified against the hashes throughout their retention. Data shall be retained in a manner consistent with all applicable privacy laws and regulations. Such recommendations shall also be considered by the FAR Council when promulgating rules pursuant to section 2 of this order.
(c) Within 90 days of receiving the recommendations described in subsection (b) of this section, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall formulate policies for agencies to establish requirements for logging, log retention, and log management, which shall ensure centralized access and visibility for the highest level security operations center of each agency.
(d) The Director of OMB shall work with agency heads to ensure that agencies have adequate resources to comply with the requirements identified in subsection (c) of this section.
(e) To address cyber risks or incidents, including potential cyber risks or incidents, the proposed recommendations issued pursuant to subsection (b) of this section shall include requirements to ensure that, upon request, agencies provide logs to the Secretary of Homeland Security through the Director of CISA and to the FBI, consistent with applicable law. These requirements should be designed to permit agencies to share log information, as needed and appropriate, with other Federal agencies for cyber risks or incidents.
(b) Nothing in this order shall alter the authority of the National Manager with respect to National Security Systems as defined in National Security Directive 42 of July 5, 1990 (National Policy for the Security of National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems) (NSD-42). The FCEB network shall continue to be within the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA.
(a) the term “agency” has the meaning ascribed to it under 44 U.S.C. 3502.
(b) the term “auditing trust relationship” means an agreed-upon relationship between two or more system elements that is governed by criteria for secure interaction, behavior, and outcomes relative to the protection of assets.
(c) the term “cyber incident” has the meaning ascribed to an “incident” under 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(2).
(d) the term “Federal Civilian Executive Branch Agencies” or “FCEB Agencies” includes all agencies except for the Department of Defense and agencies in the Intelligence Community.
(e) the term “Federal Civilian Executive Branch Information Systems” or “FCEB Information Systems” means those information systems operated by Federal Civilian Executive Branch Agencies, but excludes National Security Systems.
(f) the term “Federal Information Systems” means an information system used or operated by an agency or by a contractor of an agency or by another organization on behalf of an agency, including FCEB Information Systems and National Security Systems.
(g) the term “Intelligence Community” or “IC” has the meaning ascribed to it under 50 U.S.C. 3003(4).
(h) the term “National Security Systems” means information systems as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6), 3553(e)(2), and 3553(e)(3).
(i) the term “logs” means records of the events occurring within an organization's systems and networks. Logs are composed of log entries, and each entry contains information related to a specific event that has occurred within a system or network.
(j) the term “Software Bill of Materials” or “SBOM” means a formal record containing the details and supply chain relationships of various components used in building software. Software developers and vendors often create products by assembling existing open source and commercial software components. The SBOM enumerates these components in a product. It is analogous to a list of ingredients on food packaging. An SBOM is useful to those who develop or manufacture software, those who select or purchase software, and those who operate software. Developers often use available open source and third-party software components to create a product; an SBOM allows the builder to make sure those components are up to date and to respond quickly to new vulnerabilities. Buyers can use an SBOM to perform vulnerability or license analysis, both of which can be used to evaluate risk in a product. Those who operate software can use SBOMs to quickly and easily determine whether they are at potential risk of a newly discovered vulnerability. A widely used, machine-readable SBOM format allows for greater benefits through automation and tool integration. The SBOMs gain greater value when collectively stored in a repository that can be easily queried by other applications and systems. Understanding the supply chain of software, obtaining an SBOM, and using it to analyze known vulnerabilities are crucial in managing risk.
(k) the term “Zero Trust Architecture” means a security model, a set of system design principles, and a coordinated cybersecurity and system management strategy based on an acknowledgement that threats exist both inside and outside traditional network boundaries. The Zero Trust security model eliminates implicit trust in any one element, node, or service and instead requires continuous verification of the operational picture via real-time information from multiple sources to determine access and other system responses. In essence, a Zero Trust Architecture allows users full access but only to the bare minimum they need to perform their jobs. If a device is compromised, zero trust can ensure that the damage is contained. The Zero Trust Architecture security model assumes that a breach is inevitable or has likely already occurred, so it constantly limits access to only what is needed and looks for anomalous or malicious activity. Zero Trust Architecture embeds comprehensive security monitoring; granular risk-based access controls; and system security automation in a coordinated manner throughout all aspects of the infrastructure in order to focus on protecting data in real-time within a dynamic threat environment. This data-centric security model allows the concept of least-privileged access to be applied for every access decision, where the answers to the questions of who, what, when, where, and how are critical for appropriately allowing or denying access to resources based on the combination of sever.
(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(c) This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any
(e) Nothing in this order confers authority to interfere with or to direct a criminal or national security investigation, arrest, search, seizure, or disruption operation or to alter a legal restriction that requires an agency to protect information learned in the course of a criminal or national security investigation.
Department of the Treasury.
Interim final rule.
The Secretary of the Treasury (Treasury) is issuing this interim final rule to implement the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund established under the American Rescue Plan Act.
In general, comments received will be posted on
Katharine Richards, Senior Advisor, Office of Recovery Programs, Department of the Treasury, (844) 529-9527.
Since the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was discovered in the United States in January 2020, the disease has infected over 32 million and killed over 575,000 Americans.
Amid this once-in-a-century crisis, State, territorial, Tribal, and local governments (State, local, and Tribal governments) have been called on to respond at an immense scale. Governments have faced myriad needs to prevent and address the spread of COVID-19, including testing, contact tracing, isolation and quarantine, public communications, issuance and enforcement of health orders, expansions to health system capacity like alternative care facilities, and in recent months, a massive nationwide mobilization around vaccinations. Governments also have supported major efforts to prevent COVID-19 spread through safety measures in settings like nursing homes, schools, congregate living settings, dense worksites, incarceration settings, and public facilities. The pandemic's impacts on behavioral health, including the toll of pandemic-related stress, have increased the need for behavioral health resources.
At the same time, State, local and Tribal governments launched major efforts to address the economic impacts of the pandemic. These efforts have been tailored to the needs of their communities and have included expanded assistance to unemployed workers; food assistance; rent, mortgage, and utility support; cash assistance; internet access programs; expanded services to support individuals experiencing homelessness; support for individuals with disabilities and older adults; and assistance to small businesses facing closures or revenue loss or implementing new safety measures.
In responding to the public health emergency and its negative economic impacts, State, local, and Tribal governments have seen substantial increases in costs to provide these services, often amid substantial declines in revenue due to the economic downturn and changing economic patterns during the pandemic.
Finally, although the pandemic's impacts have been widespread, both the public health and economic impacts of the pandemic have fallen most severely on communities and populations disadvantaged before it began. Low-income communities, people of color, and Tribal communities have faced higher rates of infection, hospitalization, and death,
On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) was signed into law by the President.
Through the Fiscal Recovery Funds, Congress provided State, local, and Tribal governments with significant resources to respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency and its economic impacts through four categories of eligible uses. Section 602 and section 603 contain the same eligible uses; the primary difference between the two sections is that section 602 establishes a fund for States, territories, and Tribal governments and section 603 establishes a fund for metropolitan cities, nonentitlement units of local government, and counties. Sections 602(c)(1) and 603(c)(1) provide that funds may be used:
(a) To respond to the public health emergency or its negative economic impacts, including assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits, or aid to impacted industries such as tourism, travel, and hospitality;
(b) To respond to workers performing essential work during the COVID-19 public health emergency by providing premium pay to eligible workers;
(c) For the provision of government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue due to the COVID-19 public health emergency relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year prior to the emergency; and
(d) To make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure.
In addition, Congress clarified two types of uses which do not fall within these four categories. Sections 602(c)(2)(B) and 603(c)(2) provide that these eligible uses do not include, and thus funds may not be used for, depositing funds into any pension fund. Section 602(c)(2)(A) also provides, for States and territories, that the eligible uses do not include “directly or indirectly offset[ting] a reduction in the net tax revenue of [the] State or territory resulting from a change in law, regulation, or administrative interpretation.”
The ARPA provides a substantial infusion of resources to meet pandemic response needs and rebuild a stronger, more equitable economy as the country recovers. First, payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds help to ensure that State, local, and Tribal governments have the resources needed to continue to take actions to decrease the spread of COVID-19 and bring the pandemic under control. Payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds may also be used by recipients to provide support for costs incurred in addressing public health and economic challenges resulting from the pandemic, including resources to offer premium pay to essential workers, in recognition of their sacrifices over the
Within the eligible use categories outlined in the Fiscal Recovery Funds provisions of ARPA, State, local, and Tribal governments have flexibility to determine how best to use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to meet the needs of their communities and populations. The interim final rule facilitates swift and effective implementation by establishing a framework for determining the types of programs and services that are eligible under the ARPA along with examples of uses that State, local, and Tribal governments may consider. These uses build on eligible expenditures under the CRF, including some expansions in eligible uses to respond to the public health emergency, such as vaccination campaigns. They also reflect changes in the needs of communities, as evidenced by, for example, nationwide data demonstrating disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency on certain populations, geographies, and economic sectors. The interim final rule takes into consideration these disproportionate impacts by recognizing a broad range of eligible uses to help States, local, and Tribal governments support the families, businesses, and communities hardest hit by the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Implementation of the Fiscal Recovery Funds also reflect the importance of public input, transparency, and accountability. Treasury seeks comment on all aspects of the interim final rule and, to better facilitate public comment, has included specific questions throughout this
Sections 602(c)(1)(A) and 603(c)(1)(A) provide significant resources for State, territorial, Tribal governments, and counties, metropolitan cities, and nonentitlement units of local governments (each referred to as a recipient) to meet the wide range of public health and economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency.
These provisions authorize the use of payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to respond to the public health emergency with respect to COVID-19 or its negative economic impacts. Section 602 and section 603 also describe several types of uses that would be responsive to the impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency, including assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits and aid to impacted industries, such as tourism, travel, and hospitality.
Accordingly, to assess whether a program or service is included in this category of eligible uses, a recipient should consider whether and how the use would respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency. Assessing whether a program or service “responds to” the COVID-19 public health emergency requires the recipient to, first, identify a need or negative impact of the COVID-19 public health emergency and, second, identify how the program, service, or other intervention addresses the identified need or impact. While the COVID-19 public health emergency affected many aspects of American life, eligible uses under this category must be in response to the disease itself or the harmful consequences of the economic disruptions resulting from or exacerbated by the COVID-19 public health emergency.
The interim final rule implements these provisions by identifying a non-exclusive list of programs or services that may be funded as responding to COVID-19 or the negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency, along with considerations for evaluating other potential uses of the Fiscal Recovery Funds not explicitly listed. The interim final rule also provides flexibility for recipients to use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds for programs or services that are not identified on these non-exclusive lists but that fall under the terms of section 602(c)(1)(A) or 603(c)(1)(A) by responding to the COVID-19 public health emergency or its negative economic impacts. As an example, in determining whether a program or service responds to the negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency, the interim final rule provides that payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds should be designed to address an economic harm resulting from or exacerbated by the public health emergency. Recipients should assess the connection between the negative economic harm and the COVID-19 public health emergency, the nature and extent of that harm, and how the use of this funding would address such harm.
As discussed, the pandemic and the necessary actions taken to control the spread had a severe impact on households and small businesses, including in particular low-income workers and communities and people of color. While eligible uses under sections 602(c)(1)(A) and 603(c)(1)(A) provide flexibility to recipients to identify the most pressing local needs, Treasury encourages recipients to provide assistance to those households, businesses, and non-profits in communities most disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.
On January 21, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identified the first case of novel coronavirus in the United States.
Mitigating the impact of COVID-19, including taking actions to control its spread and support hospitals and health care workers caring for the sick, continues to require a major public health response from State, local and Tribal governments. New or heightened public health needs include COVID-19 testing, major expansions in contact tracing, support for individuals in isolation or quarantine, enforcement of public health orders, new public communication efforts, public health surveillance (
Other response and adaptation costs include capital investments in public facilities to meet pandemic operational needs, such as physical plant improvements to public hospitals and health clinics or adaptations to public buildings to implement COVID-19 mitigation tactics. In recent months, State, local, and Tribal governments across the country have mobilized to support the national vaccination campaign, resulting in over 250 million doses administered to date.
The need for public health measures to respond to COVID-19 will continue in the months and potentially years to come. This includes the continuation of the vaccination campaign for the general public and, if vaccinations are approved for children in the future, eventually for youths. This also includes monitoring the spread of COVID-19 variants, understanding the impact of these variants (especially on vaccination efforts), developing approaches to respond to those variants, and monitoring global COVID-19 trends to understand continued risks to the United States. Finally, the long-term health impacts of COVID-19 will continue to require a public health response, including medical services for individuals with “long COVID,” and research to understand how COVID-19 impacts future health needs and raises risks for the millions of Americans who have been infected.
Other areas of public health have also been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, in one survey in January 2021, over 40 percent of American adults reported symptoms of depression or anxiety, up from 11 percent in the first half of 2019.
While the pandemic affected communities across the country, it disproportionately impacted some demographic groups and exacerbated health inequities along racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines.
Similarly, low-income and socially vulnerable communities have seen the most severe health impacts. For example, counties with high poverty rates also have the highest rates of infections and deaths, with 223 deaths per 100,000 compared to the U.S. average of 175 deaths per 100,000, as of May 2021.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID Data Tracker: Trends in COVID-19 Cases
In addition, individuals living in low-income communities may have had more limited ability to socially distance or to self-isolate when ill, resulting in faster spread of the virus, and were over-represented among essential workers, who faced greater risk of exposure.
The interim final rule identifies a non-exclusive list of uses that address the effects of the COVID-19 public health emergency, including:
•
•
•
•
•
While QCTs are an effective tool generally, many tribal communities have households with a wide range of income levels due in part to non-tribal member, high income residents living in the community. Mixed income communities, with a significant share of tribal members at the lowest levels of income, are often not included as eligible QCTs yet tribal residents are experiencing disproportionate impacts due to the pandemic. Therefore, including all services provided by Tribal governments is a more effective means of ensuring that disproportionately impacted Tribal members can receive services.
Given the exacerbation of health disparities during the pandemic and the role of pre-existing social vulnerabilities in driving these disparate outcomes, services to address health disparities are presumed to be responsive to the public health impacts of the pandemic. Specifically, recipients may use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to facilitate access to resources that improve health outcomes, including services that connect residents with health care resources and public assistance programs and build healthier environments, such as:
• Funding community health workers to help community members access health services and services to address the social determinants of health;
• Funding public benefits navigators to assist community members with navigating and applying for available Federal, State, and local public benefits or services;
• Housing services to support healthy living environments and neighborhoods conducive to mental and physical wellness;
• Remediation of lead paint or other lead hazards to reduce risk of elevated blood lead levels among children; and
• Evidence-based community violence intervention programs to prevent violence and mitigate the increase in violence during the pandemic.
Rates of unemployment are particularly severe among workers of color and workers with lower levels of educational attainment; for example, the overall unemployment rate in the United States was 6.1 percent in April 2021, but certain groups saw much higher rates: 9.7 percent for Black workers, 7.9 percent for Hispanic or Latino workers, and 9.3 percent for workers without a high school diploma.
As the economy recovers, the effects of the pandemic-related recession may continue to impact households, including a risk of longer-term effects on earnings and economic potential. For example, unemployed workers, especially those who have experienced longer periods of unemployment, earn lower wages over the long term once rehired.
This negative outlook is likely the result of many small businesses having faced periods of closure and having seen declining revenues as customers stayed home.
The negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are particularly pronounced in certain communities and families. Low- and moderate-income jobs make up a substantial portion of both total pandemic job losses,
These compounding effect of recessions on concentrated poverty and the long-lasting nature of this effect were observed after the 2007-2009 recession, including a large increase in concentrated poverty with the number of people living in extremely poor neighborhoods more than doubling by 2010-2014 relative to 2000.
The negative economic impacts of COVID-19 also include significant impacts to children in disproportionately affected families and include impacts to education, health, and welfare, all of which contribute to long-term economic outcomes.
The pandemic's disproportionate economic impacts are also seen in Tribal communities across the country—for Tribal governments as well as families and businesses on and off Tribal lands. In the early months of the pandemic, Native American unemployment spiked to 26 percent and, while partially recovered, remains at nearly 11 percent.
In addition, the eligible use must “respond to” the identified negative economic impact. Responses must be related and reasonably proportional to the extent and type of harm experienced; uses that bear no relation or are grossly disproportionate to the type or extent of harm experienced would not be eligible uses. Where there has been a negative economic impact resulting from the public health emergency, States, local, and Tribal governments have broad latitude to choose whether and how to use the Fiscal Recovery Funds to respond to and address the negative economic impact. Sections 602(c)(1)(A) and 603(c)(1)(A) describe several types of uses that would be eligible under this category, including assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits and aid to impacted industries such as tourism, travel, and hospitality.
To facilitate implementation and use of payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds, the interim final rule identifies a non-exclusive list of eligible uses of funding that respond to the negative economic impacts of the public health emergency. Consistent with the discussion above, the eligible uses listed below would respond directly to the economic or financial harms resulting from and or exacerbated by the public health emergency.
•
•
•
•
•
○ Loans or grants to mitigate financial hardship such as declines in revenues or impacts of periods of business closure, for example by supporting payroll and benefits costs, costs to retain employees, mortgage, rent, or utilities costs, and other operating costs;
○ Loans, grants, or in-kind assistance to implement COVID-19 prevention or mitigation tactics, such as physical
○ Technical assistance, counseling, or other services to assist with business planning needs.
As discussed above, these services should respond to the negative economic impacts of COVID-19. Recipients may consider additional criteria to target assistance to businesses in need, including small businesses. Such criteria may include businesses facing financial insecurity, substantial declines in gross receipts (
•
•
Aid may be considered responsive to the negative economic impacts of the pandemic if it supports businesses, attractions, business districts, and Tribal development districts operating prior to the pandemic and affected by required closures and other efforts to contain the pandemic. For example, a recipient may provide aid to support safe reopening of businesses in the tourism, travel, and hospitality industries and to business districts that were closed during the COVID-19 public health emergency, as well as aid for a planned expansion or upgrade of tourism, travel, and hospitality facilities delayed due to the pandemic.
When considering providing aid to industries other than tourism, travel, and hospitality, recipients should consider the extent of the economic impact as compared to tourism, travel, and hospitality, the industries enumerated in the statute. For example, on net, the leisure and hospitality industry has experienced an approximately 24 percent decline in revenue and approximately 17 percent decline in employment nationwide due to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
To facilitate transparency and accountability, the interim final rule requires that State, local, and Tribal governments publicly report assistance provided to private-sector businesses under this eligible use, including tourism, travel, hospitality, and other impacted industries, and its connection to negative economic impacts of the pandemic. Recipients also should maintain records to support their assessment of how businesses or business districts receiving assistance were affected by the negative economic impacts of the pandemic and how the aid provided responds to these impacts.
As discussed above, economic disparities that existed prior to the COVID-19 public health emergency amplified the impact of the pandemic among low-income and minority groups. These families were more likely to face housing, food, and financial insecurity; are over-represented among low-wage workers; and many have seen their livelihoods deteriorate further during the pandemic and economic contraction. In recognition of the disproportionate negative economic impacts on certain communities and populations, the interim final rule identifies services and programs that will be presumed to be responding to the negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency when provided in these communities.
Specifically, Treasury will presume that certain types of services, outlined below, are eligible uses when provided in a QCT, to families and individuals living in QCTs, or when these services are provided by Tribal governments.
○
Services to address homelessness such as supportive housing, and to improve access to stable, affordable housing among unhoused individuals;
Affordable housing development to increase supply of affordable and high-quality living units; and
Housing vouchers, residential counseling, or housing navigation assistance to facilitate household moves to neighborhoods with high levels of economic opportunity and mobility for low-income residents, to help residents increase their economic opportunity and reduce concentrated areas of low economic opportunity.
○
New, expanded, or enhanced early learning services, including pre-kindergarten, Head Start, or partnerships between pre-kindergarten programs and local education authorities, or administration of those services;
Providing assistance to high-poverty school districts to advance equitable funding across districts and geographies;
Evidence-based educational services and practices to address the academic needs of students, including tutoring, summer, afterschool, and other extended learning and enrichment programs; and
Evidence-based practices to address the social, emotional, and mental health needs of students;
○
New or expanded high-quality childcare to provide safe and supportive care for children;
Home visiting programs to provide structured visits from health, parent educators, and social service professionals to pregnant women or families with young children to offer education and assistance navigating resources for economic support, health needs, or child development; and
Enhanced services for child welfare-involved families and foster youth to provide support and training on child development, positive parenting, coping skills, or recovery for mental health and substance use challenges.
State, local, and Tribal governments are encouraged to use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to respond to the direct and immediate needs of the pandemic and its negative economic impacts and, in particular, the needs of households and businesses that were disproportionately and negatively impacted by the public health emergency. As highlighted above, low-income communities and workers and people of color have faced more severe health and economic outcomes during the pandemic, with pre-existing social vulnerabilities like low-wage or insecure employment, concentrated neighborhoods with less economic opportunity, and pre-existing health disparities likely contributing to the magnified impact of the pandemic. The Fiscal Recovery Funds provide resources to not only respond to the immediate harms of the pandemic but also to mitigate its longer-term impact in compounding the systemic public health and economic challenges of disproportionately impacted populations. Treasury encourages recipients to consider funding uses that foster a strong, inclusive, and equitable recovery, especially uses with long-term benefits for health and economic outcomes.
This category of eligible uses also would not include contributions to rainy day funds, financial reserves, or similar funds. Resources made available under this eligible use category are intended to help meet pandemic response needs and provide relief for households and businesses facing near- and long-term negative economic impacts. Contributions to rainy day funds and similar financial reserves would not address these needs or respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency but would rather constitute savings for future spending needs. Similarly, this eligible use category would not include payment of interest or principal on outstanding debt instruments, including, for example, short-term revenue or tax anticipation notes, or other debt service costs. As discussed below, payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds are intended to be used prospectively and the interim final rule precludes use of these funds to cover the costs of debt incurred prior to March 3, 2021. Fees or issuance costs associated with the issuance of new debt would also not be covered using payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds because such costs would not themselves have been incurred to address the needs of pandemic response or its negative economic impacts. The purpose of the Fiscal Recovery Funds is to provide fiscal relief that will permit State, local, and Tribal governments to continue to respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
For the same reasons, this category of eligible uses would not include satisfaction of any obligation arising under or pursuant to a settlement agreement, judgment, consent decree, or judicially confirmed debt restructuring
In addition, as described in Section V.III of this
Fiscal Recovery Funds payments may be used by recipients to provide premium pay to eligible workers performing essential work during the COVID-19 public health emergency or to provide grants to third-party employers with eligible workers performing essential work.
Since the start of the COVID-19 public health emergency in January 2020, essential workers have put their physical wellbeing at risk to meet the daily needs of their communities and to provide care for others. In the course of this work, many essential workers have contracted or died of COVID-19.
• Staff at nursing homes, hospitals, and home care settings;
• Workers at farms, food production facilities, grocery stores, and restaurants;
• Janitors and sanitation workers;
• Truck drivers, transit staff, and warehouse workers;
• Public health and safety staff;
• Childcare workers, educators, and other school staff; and
• Social service and human services staff.
During the public health emergency, employers' policies on COVID-19-related hazard pay have varied widely, with many essential workers not yet compensated for the heightened risks they have faced and continue to face.
The Fiscal Recovery Funds will help respond to the needs of essential workers by allowing recipients to remunerate essential workers for the elevated health risks they have faced and continue to face during the public health emergency. To ensure that premium pay is targeted to workers that faced or face heightened risks due to the character of their work, the interim final rule defines essential work as work involving regular in-person interactions or regular physical handling of items that were also handled by others. A worker would not be engaged in essential work and, accordingly may not receive premium pay, for telework performed from a residence.
Sections 602(g)(2) and 603(g)(2) define eligible worker to mean “those workers needed to maintain continuity of operations of essential critical infrastructure sectors and additional sectors as each Governor of a State or territory, or each Tribal government, may designate as critical to protect the health and well-being of the residents of their State, territory, or Tribal government.”
In providing premium pay to essential workers or grants to eligible employers, a recipient must consider whether the pay or grant would “respond to” to the worker or workers performing essential work. Premium pay or grants provided under this section respond to workers performing essential work if it addresses the heightened risk to workers who must be physically present at a jobsite and, for many of whom, the costs associated with illness were hardest to bear financially. Many of the workers performing critical essential services are low- or moderate-income workers, such as those described above. The ARPA recognizes this by defining premium pay to mean an amount up to $13 per hour in addition to wages or remuneration the worker otherwise receives and in an aggregate amount not to exceed $25,000 per eligible worker. To ensure the provision is implemented in a manner that compensates these workers, the interim final rule provides that any premium pay or grants provided using the Fiscal Recovery Funds should prioritize compensation of those lower income eligible workers that perform essential work.
As such, providing premium pay to eligible workers responds to such workers by helping address the disparity between the critical services and risks taken by essential workers and the relatively low compensation they tend to receive in exchange. If premium pay would increase a worker's total pay above 150 percent of their residing state's average annual wage for all occupations, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, or their residing county's average annual wage, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, whichever is higher, on an annual basis, the State, local, or Tribal government must provide Treasury and make publicly available, whether for themselves or on behalf of a grantee, a written justification of how the premium pay or grant is responsive to workers performing essential worker during the public health emergency.
The threshold of 150 percent for requiring additional written justification is based on an analysis of the distribution of labor income for a sample of 20 occupations that generally correspond to the essential workers as defined in the interim final rule.
Furthermore, because premium pay is intended to compensate essential workers for heightened risk due to COVID-19, it must be entirely additive to a worker's regular rate of wages and other remuneration and may not be used to reduce or substitute for a worker's normal earnings. The definition of premium pay also clarifies that premium pay may be provided retrospectively for work performed at any time since the start of the COVID-19 public health emergency, where those workers have yet to be compensated adequately for work previously performed.
To ensure any grants respond to the needs of essential workers and are made in a fair and transparent manner, the rule imposes some additional reporting requirements for grants to third-party employers, including the public disclosure of grants provided.
Recipients may use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds for the provision of government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue experienced due to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Many State, local, and Tribal governments are experiencing significant budget shortfalls, which can have a devastating impact on communities. State government tax revenue from major sources were down 4.3 percent in the six months ended September 2020, relative to the same period 2019.
Further, State, local, and Tribal government budgets affect the broader economic recovery. During the period following the 2007-2009 recession, State and local government budget pressures led to fiscal austerity that was a significant drag on the overall economic recovery.
Sections 602(c)(1)(C) and 603(c)(1)(C) of the Act allow recipients facing budget shortfalls to use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to avoid cuts to government services and, thus, enable State, local, and Tribal governments to continue to provide valuable services and ensure that fiscal austerity measures do not hamper the broader economic recovery. The interim final rule implements these provisions by establishing a definition of “general revenue” for purposes of calculating a loss in revenue and by providing a methodology for calculating revenue lost due to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
The interim final rule defines the term “general revenue” to include revenues collected by a recipient and generated from its underlying economy and would capture a range of different types of tax revenues, as well as other types of revenue that are available to support government services.
Consistent with the Census Bureau's definition of “general revenue from own sources,” the definition of general revenue in the interim final rule would exclude refunds and other correcting transactions, proceeds from issuance of debt or the sale of investments, and agency or private trust transactions. The definition of general revenue also would exclude revenue generated by utilities and insurance trusts. In this way, the definition of general revenue focuses on sources that are generated from economic activity and are available to fund government services, rather than a fund or administrative unit established to account for and control a particular activity.
The definition of general revenue would include all revenue from Tribal enterprises, as this revenue is generated from economic activity and is available to fund government services. Tribes are not able to generate revenue through taxes in the same manner as State and local governments and, as a result, Tribal enterprises are critical sources of revenue for Tribal governments that enable Tribal governments to provide a range of services, including elder care, health clinics, wastewater management, and forestry.
Finally, the term “general revenue” includes intergovernmental transfers between State and local governments, but excludes intergovernmental transfers from the Federal Government, including Federal transfers made via a State to a local government pursuant to the CRF or as part of the Fiscal Recovery Funds. States and local governments often share or collect revenue on behalf of one another, which results in intergovernmental transfers. When attributing revenue to a unit of government, the Census Bureau's methodology considers which unit of government imposes, collects, and retains the revenue and assigns the revenue to the unit of government that meets at least two of those three factors.
For purposes of measuring revenue growth in the counterfactual trend, recipients may use a
Recipients should calculate the extent of the reduction in revenue as of four points in time: December 31, 2020; December 31, 2021; December 31, 2022; and December 31, 2023. To calculate the extent of the reduction in revenue at each of these dates, recipients should follow a four-step process:
•
•
•
•
For illustration, consider a hypothetical recipient with
The overall methodology for calculating the reduction in revenue is illustrated in the figure below:
Sections 602(c)(1)(C) and 603(c)(1)(C) of the Act provide recipients with broad latitude to use the Fiscal Recovery Funds for the provision of government services. Government services can include, but are not limited to, maintenance or pay-go funded building
To assist in meeting the critical need for investments and improvements to existing infrastructure in water, sewer, and broadband, the Fiscal Recovery Funds provide funds to State, local, and Tribal governments to make necessary investments in these sectors. The interim final rule outlines eligible uses within each category, allowing for a broad range of necessary investments in projects that improve access to clean drinking water, improve wastewater and stormwater infrastructure systems, and provide access to high-quality broadband service. Necessary investments are designed to provide an adequate minimum level of service and are unlikely to be made using private sources of funds. Necessary investments include projects that are required to maintain a level of service that, at least, meets applicable health-based standards, taking into account resilience to climate change, or establishes or improves broadband service to unserved or underserved populations to reach an adequate level to permit a household to work or attend school, and that are unlikely to be met with private sources of funds.
It is important that necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure be carried out in ways that produce high-quality infrastructure, avert disruptive and costly delays, and promote efficiency. Treasury encourages recipients to ensure that water, sewer, and broadband projects use strong labor standards, including project labor agreements and community benefits agreements that offer wages at or above the prevailing rate and include local hire provisions, not only to promote effective and efficient delivery of high-quality infrastructure projects but also to support the economic recovery through strong employment opportunities for workers. Using these practices in construction projects may help to ensure a reliable supply of skilled labor that would minimize disruptions, such as those associated with labor disputes or workplace injuries.
To provide public transparency on whether projects are using practices that promote on-time and on-budget delivery, Treasury will seek information from recipients on their workforce plans and practices related to water, sewer, and broadband projects undertaken with Fiscal Recovery Funds. Treasury will provide additional guidance and instructions on the reporting requirements at a later date.
The ARPA provides funds to State, local, and Tribal governments to make necessary investments in water and sewer infrastructure.
Established by the 1987 amendments
The DWSRF was modeled on the CWSRF and created as part of the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
By aligning use of Fiscal Recovery Funds with the categories or types of eligible projects under the existing EPA state revolving fund programs, the interim final rule provides recipients with the flexibility to respond to the needs of their communities while ensuring that investments in water and sewer infrastructure made using Fiscal Recovery Funds are necessary. As discussed above, the CWSRF and DWSRF were designed to provide funding for projects that protect public health and safety by ensuring compliance with wastewater and drinking water health standards.
In addition, responding to the immediate needs of the COVID-19 public health emergency may have diverted both personnel and financial resources from other State, local, and Tribal priorities, including projects to ensure compliance with applicable water health and quality standards and provide safe drinking and usable water.
Recipients may use Fiscal Recovery Funds to invest in a broad range of projects that improve drinking water infrastructure, such as building or upgrading facilities and transmission, distribution, and storage systems, including replacement of lead service lines. Given the lifelong impacts of lead exposure for children, and the widespread nature of lead service lines, Treasury encourages recipients to consider projects to replace lead service lines.
Fiscal Recovery Funds may also be used to support the consolidation or establishment of drinking water systems. With respect to wastewater infrastructure, recipients may use Fiscal Recovery Funds to construct publicly owned treatment infrastructure, manage and treat stormwater or subsurface drainage water, facilitate water reuse, and secure publicly owned treatment works, among other uses. Finally, consistent with the CWSRF and DWSRF, Fiscal Recovery Funds may be used for cybersecurity needs to protect water or sewer infrastructure, such as developing effective cybersecurity practices and measures at drinking water systems and publicly owned treatment works.
Many of the types of projects eligible under either the CWSRF or DWSRF also support efforts to address climate change. For example, by taking steps to manage potential sources of pollution and preventing these sources from reaching sources of drinking water, projects eligible under the DWSRF and the ARPA may reduce energy required to treat drinking water. Similarly, projects eligible under the CWSRF include measures to conserve and reuse water or reduce the energy consumption of public water treatment facilities. Treasury encourages recipients to consider green infrastructure investments and projects to improve resilience to the effects of climate change. For example, more frequent and extreme precipitation events combined with construction and development trends have led to increased instances of stormwater runoff, water pollution, and flooding. Green infrastructure projects that support stormwater system resiliency could include rain gardens that provide water storage and filtration benefits, and green streets, where vegetation, soil, and engineered systems are combined to direct and filter rainwater from impervious surfaces. In cases of a natural disaster, recipients may also use Fiscal Recovery Funds to provide relief, such as interconnecting water systems or rehabilitating existing wells during an extended drought.
The COVID-19 public health emergency has underscored the importance of universally available, high-speed, reliable, and affordable broadband coverage as millions of Americans rely on the internet to participate in, among critical activities, remote school, healthcare, and work. Recognizing the need for such connectivity, the ARPA provides funds to State, territorial, local, and Tribal governments to make necessary investments in broadband infrastructure.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) highlighted the growing necessity of broadband in daily lives through its analysis of NTIA Internet Use Survey data, noting that Americans turn to broadband internet access service for every facet of daily life including work, study, and healthcare.
By at least one measure, however, tens of millions of Americans live in areas where there is no broadband infrastructure that provides download speeds greater than 25 Mbps and upload speeds of 3 Mbps.
The interim final rule provides that eligible investments in broadband are those that are designed to provide services meeting adequate speeds and are provided to unserved and underserved households and businesses. Understanding that States, territories, localities, and Tribal governments have a wide range of varied broadband infrastructure needs, the interim final rule provides award recipients with flexibility to identify the specific locations within their communities to be served and to otherwise design the project.
Under the interim final rule, eligible projects are expected to be designed to deliver, upon project completion, service that reliably meets or exceeds symmetrical upload and download speeds of 100 Mbps. There may be instances in which it would not be practicable for a project to deliver such service speeds because of the geography, topography, or excessive costs associated with such a project. In these instances, the affected project would be expected to be designed to deliver, upon project completion, service that reliably meets or exceeds 100 Mbps download and between at least 20 Mbps and 100 Mbps upload speeds and be scalable to a minimum of 100 Mbps symmetrical for download and upload speeds.
In considering the appropriate speed requirements for eligible projects, Treasury considered estimates of typical households demands during the pandemic. Using the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Broadband Speed Guide, for example, a household with two telecommuters and two to three remote learners today are estimated to need 100 Mbps download to work simultaneously.
In considering the appropriate speed requirements for eligible projects, Treasury also considered data usage patterns and how bandwidth needs have changed over time for U.S. households and businesses as people's use of technology in their daily lives has evolved. In the few years preceding the pandemic, market research data showed that average upload speeds in the United States surpassed over 10 Mbps in 2017
The increasing use of data accelerated markedly during the pandemic as households across the country became increasingly reliant on tools and applications that require greater internet capacity, both to download data but also to upload data. Sending information became as important as receiving it. A video consultation with a healthcare provider or participation by a child in a live classroom with a teacher and fellow students requires video to be sent and received simultaneously.
This need for increased broadband capacity during the pandemic was reflected in increased usage patterns seen over the last year. As OpenVault noted in recent advisories, the pandemic significantly increased the amount of data users consume. Among data users observed by OpenVault, per-subscriber average data usage for the fourth quarter of 2020 was 482.6 gigabytes per month, representing a 40 percent increase over the 344 gigabytes consumed in the fourth quarter of 2019 and a 26 percent increase over the third quarter 2020 average of 383.8 gigabytes.
Jurisdictions and Federal programs are increasingly responding to the growing demands of their communities for both heightened download and upload speeds. For example, Illinois now requires 100 Mbps symmetrical service as the construction standard for its state broadband grant programs. This standard is also consistent with speed levels, particularly download speed levels, prioritized by other Federal programs supporting broadband projects. Bids submitted as part of the FCC in its Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF), established to support the construction of broadband networks in rural communities across the country, are given priority if they offer faster service, with the service offerings of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload being included in the “above baseline” performance tier set by the FCC.
The 100 Mbps upload and download speeds will support the increased and growing needs of households and businesses. Recognizing that, in some instances, 100 Mbps upload speed may be impracticable due to geographical, topographical, or financial constraints, the interim final rule permits upload speeds of between at least 20 Mbps and 100 Mbps in such instances. To provide for investments that will accommodate technologies requiring symmetry in download and upload speeds, as noted above, eligible projects that are not designed to deliver, upon project completion, service that reliably meets or exceeds symmetrical speeds of 100 Mbps because it would be impracticable to do so should be designed so that they can be scalable to such speeds. Recipients are also encouraged to prioritize investments in fiber optic infrastructure where feasible, as such advanced technology enables the next generation of application solutions for all communities.
Under the interim final rule, eligible projects are expected to focus on locations that are unserved or underserved. The interim final rule treats users as being unserved or underserved if they lack access to a wireline connection capable of reliably delivering at least minimum speeds of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload as households and businesses lacking this level of access are generally not viewed as being able to originate and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video telecommunications. This threshold is consistent with the FCC's benchmark for an “advanced telecommunications capability.”
Recipients are also encouraged to consider ways to integrate affordability options into their program design. To meet the immediate needs of unserved and underserved households and businesses, recipients are encouraged to focus on projects that deliver a physical broadband connection by prioritizing projects that achieve last mile-connections. Treasury also encourages recipients to prioritize support for broadband networks owned, operated by, or affiliated with local governments, non-profits, and co-operatives—providers with less pressure to turn profits and with a commitment to serving entire communities.
Under sections 602(c)(1)(A) and 603(c)(1)(A), assistance to households facing negative economic impacts due to COVID-19 is also an eligible use, including internet access or digital literacy assistance. As discussed above, in considering whether a potential use is eligible under this category, a recipient must consider whether, and the extent to which, the household has experienced a negative economic impact from the pandemic.
As discussed above, recipients have considerable flexibility to use Fiscal Recovery Funds to address the diverse needs of their communities. To ensure that payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds are used for these congressionally permitted purposes, the ARPA includes two provisions that further define the boundaries of the statute's eligible uses. Section 602(c)(2)(A) of the Act provides that States and territories may not “use the funds . . . to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in . . . net tax revenue . . . resulting from a change in law, regulation, or administrative interpretation during the covered period that reduces any tax . . . or delays the imposition of any tax or tax increase.” In addition, sections 602(c)(2)(B) and 603(c)(2) prohibit any recipient, including cities, nonentitlement units of government, and counties, from using Fiscal Recovery Funds for deposit into any pension fund. These restrictions support the use of funds for the congressionally permitted purposes described in Section II of this Supplementary Information by providing a backstop against the use of funds for purposes outside of the eligible use categories.
These provisions give force to Congress's clear intent that Fiscal Recovery Funds be spent within the four eligible uses identified in the statute—(1) to respond to the public health emergency and its negative economic impacts, (2) to provide premium pay to essential workers, (3) to provide government services to the extent of eligible governments' revenue losses, and (4) to make necessary water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure investments—and not otherwise. These four eligible uses reflect Congress's judgment that the Fiscal Recovery Funds should be expended in particular ways that support recovery from the COVID-19 public health emergency. The further restrictions reflect Congress's judgment that tax cuts and pension deposits do not fall within these eligible uses. The interim final rule describes how Treasury will identify when such uses have occurred and how it will recoup funds put toward these impermissible uses and, as discussed in Section VIII of this
The statute provides that recipients may not use Fiscal Recovery Funds for “deposit into any pension fund.” For the reasons discussed below, Treasury interprets “deposit” in this context to refer to an extraordinary payment into a pension fund for the purpose of reducing an accrued, unfunded liability. More specifically, the interim final rule does not permit this assistance to be used to make a payment into a pension fund if both:
1. The payment reduces a liability incurred prior to the start of the COVID-19 public health emergency, and
2. the payment occurs outside the recipient's regular timing for making such payments.
Under this interpretation, a “deposit” is distinct from a “payroll contribution,” which occurs when employers make payments into pension funds on regular intervals, with contribution amounts based on a pre-determined percentage of employees' wages and salaries.
As discussed above, eligible uses for premium pay and responding to the negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency include hiring and compensating public sector employees. Interpreting the scope of “deposit” to exclude contributions that are part of payroll contributions is more consistent with these eligible uses and would reduce administrative burden for recipients. Accordingly, if an employee's wages and salaries are an eligible use of Fiscal Recovery Funds, recipients may treat the employee's covered benefits as an eligible use of Fiscal Recovery Funds. For purposes of the Fiscal Recovery Funds, covered benefits include costs of all types of leave (vacation, family-related, sick, military, bereavement, sabbatical, jury duty), employee insurance (health, life, dental, vision), retirement (pensions, 401(k)), unemployment benefit plans
Treasury anticipates that this approach to employees' covered benefits will be comprehensive and, for employees whose wage and salary costs are eligible expenses, will allow all covered benefits listed in the previous paragraph to be eligible under the Fiscal Recovery Funds. Treasury expects that this will minimize the administrative burden on recipients by treating all the specified covered benefit types as eligible expenses, for employees whose wage and salary costs are eligible expenses.
For States and territories (recipient governments
The interim final rule implements these conditions by establishing a framework for States and territories to determine the cost of changes in law, regulation, or interpretation that reduce tax revenue and to identify and value the sources of funds that will offset—
In order to reduce burden, the interim final rule's approach also incorporates the types of information and modeling already used by States and territories in their own fiscal and budgeting processes. By incorporating existing budgeting processes and capabilities, States and territories will be able to assess and evaluate the relationship of tax and budget decisions to uses of the Fiscal Recovery Funds based on information they likely have or can obtain. This approach ensures that recipient governments have the information they need to understand the implications of their decisions regarding the use of the Fiscal Recovery Funds—and, in particular, whether they are using the funds to directly or indirectly offset a reduction in net tax revenue, making them potentially subject to recoupment.
Reporting on both the eligible uses and on a State's or territory's covered tax changes that would reduce tax revenue will enable identification of, and recoupment for, use of Fiscal Recovery Funds to directly offset reductions in tax revenue resulting from tax relief. Moreover, this approach recognizes that, because money is fungible, even if Fiscal Recovery Funds are not explicitly or directly used to cover the costs of changes that reduce net tax revenue, those funds may be used in a manner inconsistent with the statute by indirectly being used to substitute for the State's or territory's funds that would otherwise have been needed to cover the costs of the reduction. By focusing on the cost of changes that reduce net tax revenue—and how a recipient government is offsetting those reductions in constructing its budget over the covered period—the framework prevents efforts to use Fiscal Recovery Funds to indirectly offset reductions in net tax revenue for which the recipient government has not identified other offsetting sources of funding.
As discussed in greater detail below in this preamble, the framework set forth in the interim final rule establishes a step-by-step process for determining whether, and the extent to which, Fiscal Recovery Funds have been used to offset a reduction in net tax revenue. Based on information reported annually by the recipient government:
• First, each year, each recipient government will identify and value the changes in law, regulation, or interpretation that would result in a reduction in net tax revenue, as it would in the ordinary course of its budgeting process. The sum of these values in the year for which the government is reporting is the amount it needs to “pay for” with sources other than Fiscal Recovery Funds (total value of revenue reducing changes).
• Second, the interim final rule recognizes that it may be difficult to predict how a change would affect net tax revenue in future years and, accordingly, provides that if the total value of the changes in the year for which the recipient government is reporting is below a de minimis level, as discussed below, the recipient government need not identify any sources of funding to pay for revenue reducing changes and will not be subject to recoupment.
• Third, a recipient government will consider the amount of actual tax revenue recorded in the year for which they are reporting. If the recipient government's actual tax revenue is greater than the amount of tax revenue received by the recipient for the fiscal year ending 2019, adjusted annually for inflation, the recipient government will not be considered to have violated the offset provision because there will not have been a reduction in net tax revenue.
• Fourth, if the recipient government's actual tax revenue is less than the amount of tax revenue received by the recipient government for the fiscal year ending 2019, adjusted annually for inflation, in the reporting year the recipient government will identify any sources of funds that have been used to permissibly offset the total value of covered tax changes other than Fiscal Recovery Funds. These are:
○ State or territory tax changes that would increase any source of general
○ Spending cuts in areas not being replaced by Fiscal Recovery Funds.
The recipient government will calculate the value of revenue reduction remaining after applying these sources of offsetting funding to the total value of revenue reducing changes—that, is, how much of the tax change has not been paid for. The recipient government will then compare that value to the difference between the baseline and actual tax revenue. A recipient government will not be required to repay to the Treasury an amount that is greater than the recipient government's actual tax revenue shortfall relative to the baseline (
• Finally, if there are any amounts that could be subject to recoupment, Treasury will provide notice to the recipient government of such amounts. This process is discussed in greater detail in Section IV of this
Together, these steps allow Treasury to identify the amount of reduction in net tax revenue that both is attributable to covered changes and has been directly or indirectly offset with Fiscal Recovery Funds. This process ensures Fiscal Recovery Funds are used in a manner consistent with the statute's defined eligible uses and the offset provision's limitation on these eligible uses, while avoiding undue interference with State and territory decisions regarding tax and spending policies.
The interim final rule also implements a process for recouping Fiscal Recovery Funds that were used to offset reductions in net tax revenue, including the calculation of any amounts that may be subject to recoupment, a process for a recipient government to respond to a notice of recoupment, and clarification regarding amounts excluded from recoupment.
The interim final rule includes several definitions that are applicable to the implementation of the offset provision.
FY 2019 was chosen as the starting year for the baseline because it is the last full fiscal year prior to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
(1)
In general and where possible, reporting should be produced by the agency of the recipient government responsible for estimating the costs and effects of fiscal policy changes. This approach offers recipient governments the flexibility to determine their reporting methodology based on their existing budget scoring practices and capabilities. In addition, the approach of using the projected value of changes in law that enact fiscal policies to estimate the net effect of such policies is consistent with the way many States and territories already consider tax changes.
(2)
The de minimis level is calculated as 1 percent of the reporting year's baseline. Treasury recognizes that, pursuant to their taxing authority, States and territories may make many small changes to alter the composition of their tax revenues or implement other policies with marginal effects on tax revenues. They may also make changes based on projected revenue effects that turn out to differ from actual effects, unintentionally resulting in minor revenue changes that are not fairly described as “resulting from” tax law changes. The de minimis level recognizes the inherent challenges and uncertainties that recipient governments face, and thus allows relatively small reductions in tax revenue without consequence. Treasury determined the 1 percent level by assessing the historical effects of state-level tax policy changes in state EITCs implemented to effect policy goals other than reducing net tax revenues.
(3)
(4)
(a)
(b)
To calculate the amount of spending cuts that are available to offset a reduction in tax revenue, the recipient government must first consider whether there has been a reduction in total net spending, excluding Fiscal Recovery Funds (net reduction in total spending). This approach ensures that reported spending cuts actually create fiscal space, rather than simply offsetting other spending increases. A net reduction in total spending is measured as the difference between total spending in each reporting year, excluding Fiscal Recovery Funds spent, relative to total spending for the recipient's fiscal year ending in 2019, adjusted for inflation. Measuring reductions in spending relative to 2019 reflects the fact that the fiscal space created by a spending cut persists so long as spending remains below its original level, even if it does not decline further, relative to the same amount of revenue. Measuring spending cuts from year to year would, by contrast, not recognize any available funds to offset revenue reductions unless spending continued to decline, failing to reflect the actual availability of funds created by a persistent change and limiting the discretion of States and territories. In general and where possible, reporting should be produced by the agency of the recipient government responsible for estimating the costs and effects of fiscal policy changes. Treasury chose this approach because while many recipient governments may score budget legislation using projections, spending cuts are readily observable using actual values.
This approach—allowing only spending reductions in areas where the recipient government has not spent Fiscal Recovery Funds to be used as an offset for a reduction in net tax revenue—aims to prevent recipient governments from using Fiscal Recovery Funds to supplant State or territory funding in the eligible use areas, and then use those State or territory funds to offset tax cuts. Such an approach helps ensure that Fiscal Recovery Funds are not used to “indirectly” offset revenue reductions due to covered changes.
In order to help ensure recipient governments use Fiscal Recovery Funds in a manner consistent with the prescribed eligible uses and do not use Fiscal Recovery Funds to indirectly offset a reduction in net tax revenue resulting from a covered change, Treasury will monitor changes in spending throughout the covered period. If, over the course of the covered period, a spending cut is subsequently replaced with Fiscal Recovery Funds and used to indirectly offset a reduction in net tax revenue resulting from a covered change, Treasury may consider such change to be an evasion of the restrictions of the offset provision and seek recoupment of such amounts.
(5)
Finally, as discussed further in Section IV of this
To facilitate the implementation of the framework above, and in addition to reporting required on eligible uses, in each year of the reporting period, each State and territory will report to Treasury the following items:
• Actual net tax revenue for the reporting year;
• Each revenue-reducing change made to date during the covered period and the in-year value of each change;
• Each revenue-raising change made to date during the covered period and the in-year value of each change;
• Each covered spending cut made to date during the covered period, the in-year value of each cut, and documentation demonstrating that each spending cut is covered as prescribed under the interim final rule;
Treasury will provide additional guidance and instructions the reporting requirements at a later date.
Payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds are also subject to pre-existing limitations provided in other Federal statutes and regulations and may not be used as non-Federal match for other Federal programs whose statute or regulations bar the use of Federal funds to meet matching requirements. For example, payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds may not be used to satisfy the State share of Medicaid.
As provided for in the award terms, payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds as a general matter will be subject to the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 CFR part 200) (the Uniform Guidance), including the cost principles and restrictions on general provisions for selected items of cost.
Section 602(c)(1) and section 603(c)(1) require that payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds be used only to cover costs incurred by the State, territory, Tribal government, or local government by December 31, 2024. Similarly, the CARES Act provided that payments from the CRF be used to cover costs incurred by December 31, 2021.
Payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds are grants provided to recipients to mitigate the fiscal effects of the COVID-19 public health emergency and to respond to the public health emergency, consistent with the eligible uses enumerated in sections 602(c)(1) and 603(c)(1).
As discussed above, recipients are permitted to use payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to respond to the public health emergency, to respond to workers performing essential work by providing premium pay or providing grants to eligible employers, and to make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure, which all relate to prospective uses. In addition, sections 602(c)(1)(C) and 603(c)(1)(C) permit recipients to use Fiscal Recovery Funds for the provision of government services. This clause provides that the amount of funds that may be used for this purpose is measured by reference to the reduction in revenue due to the public health emergency relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year, but this reference does not relate to the period during which recipients may use the funds, which instead refers to prospective uses, consistent with the other eligible uses.
Although as discussed above the eligible uses of payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds are all prospective in nature, Treasury considers the beginning of the covered period for purposes of determining compliance with section 602(c)(2)(A) to be the relevant reference point for this purpose. The interim final rule thus permits funds to be used to cover costs incurred beginning on March 3, 2021. This aligns the period for use of Fiscal Recovery Funds with the period during which these funds may not be used to offset reductions in net tax revenue. Permitting Fiscal Recovery Funds to be used to cover costs incurred beginning on this date will also mean that recipients that began incurring costs in the anticipation of enactment of the ARPA and in advance of the issuance of this rule and receipt of payment from the Fiscal Recovery Funds would be able to cover them using these payments.
As set forth in the award terms, the period of performance will run until December 31, 2026, which will provide recipients a reasonable amount of time to complete projects funded with payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds.
Under the ARPA, failure to comply with the restrictions on use contained in sections 602(c) and 603(c) of the Act may result in recoupment of funds.
The interim final rule also establishes requirements for the timing of a request for reconsideration. Specifically, if a recipient wishes to request reconsideration of any amounts identified in the notice, the recipient must submit a written request for reconsideration to the Secretary within 60 calendar days of receipt of such notice. The request must include an explanation of why the recipient believes that the finding of a violation or recoupable amount identified in the notice of recoupment should be reconsidered. To facilitate the Secretary's review of a recipient's request for reconsideration, the request should identify all supporting reasons for the request. Within 60 calendar days of receipt of the recipient's request for reconsideration, the recipient will be notified of the Secretary's decision to affirm, withdraw, or modify the notice of recoupment. Such notification will include an explanation of the decision, including responses to the recipient's supporting reasons and consideration of additional information provided.
The process and timeline established by the interim final rule are intended to provide the recipient with an adequate opportunity to fully present any issues or arguments in response to the notice of recoupment.
Section 603 of the Act provides that the Secretary will make payments to local governments in two tranches, with the second tranche being paid twelve months after the first payment. In addition, section 602(b)(6)(A)(ii) provides that the Secretary may withhold payment of up to 50 percent of the amount allocated to each State and territory for a period of up to twelve months from the date on which the State or territory provides its certification to the Secretary. Any such withholding for a State or territory is required to be based on the unemployment rate in the State or territory as of the date of the certification.
The Secretary has determined to provide in this interim final rule for withholding of 50 percent of the amount of Fiscal Recovery Funds allocated to all States (and the District of Columbia) other than those with an unemployment rate that is 2.0 percentage points or more above its pre-pandemic (
Splitting payments for the majority of States is consistent with the requirement in section 603 of the Act to make payments from the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund to local governments in two tranches.
At the same time, the statute contemplates the possibility that elevated unemployment in certain States could justify a single payment. Elevated unemployment is indicative of a greater need to assist unemployed workers and stimulate a faster economic recovery. For this reason, the interim final rule provides that States and territories with an increase in their unemployment rate over a specified threshold may receive a single payment, with the expectation that a single tranche will better enable these States and territories to take additional immediate action to aid the unemployed and strengthen their economies.
Following the initial pandemic-related spike in unemployment in 2020, States' unemployment rates have been trending back towards pre-pandemic levels. However, some States' labor markets are healing more slowly than others. Moreover, States varied widely in their pre-pandemic levels of unemployment, and some States remain substantially further from their pre-
Treasury has established that significant remaining elevation in the unemployment rate is a net change in the unemployment rate of 2.0 percentage points or more relative to pre-pandemic levels. In the four previous recessions going back to the early 1980s, the national unemployment rate rose by 3.6, 2.3, 2.0, and 5.0 percentage points, as measured from the start of the recession to the eventual peak during or immediately following the recession.
No U.S. territory will be subject to withholding of its payment from the Fiscal Recovery Funds. For Puerto Rico, the Secretary has determined that the current level of the unemployment rate (8.8 percent, as of March 2021
The statute authorizes State, territorial, and Tribal governments; counties; metropolitan cities; and nonentitlement units of local government (counties, metropolitan cities, and nonentitlement units of local government are collectively referred to as “local governments”) to transfer amounts paid from the Fiscal Recovery Funds to a number of specified entities. By permitting these transfers, Congress recognized the importance of providing flexibility to governments seeking to achieve the greatest impact with their funds, including by working with other levels or units of government or private entities to assist recipient governments in carrying out their programs. This includes special-purpose districts that perform specific functions in the community, such as fire, water, sewer, or mosquito abatement districts.
Specifically, under section 602(c)(3), a State, territory, or Tribal government may transfer funds to a “private nonprofit organization . . . a Tribal organization . . . a public benefit corporation involved in the transportation of passengers or cargo, or a special-purpose unit of State or local government.”
The interim final rule clarifies that the lists of transferees in sections 602(c)(3) and 603(c)(3) are not exclusive. The interim final rule permits State, territorial, and Tribal governments to transfer Fiscal Recovery Funds to other constituent units of government or private entities beyond those specified in the statute. Similarly, local governments are authorized to transfer Fiscal Recovery Funds to other constituent units of government (
State, local, territorial, and Tribal governments that receive a Federal award directly from a Federal awarding agency, such as Treasury, are “recipients.” A transferee receiving a transfer from a recipient under sections 602(c)(3) and 603(c)(3) will be a subrecipient. Subrecipients are entities that receive a subaward from a recipient to carry out a program or project on behalf of the recipient with the recipient's Federal award funding. The recipient remains responsible for monitoring and overseeing the subrecipient's use of Fiscal Recovery Funds and other activities related to the award to ensure that the subrecipient complies with the statutory and regulatory requirements and the terms and conditions of the award. Recipients also remain responsible for reporting to Treasury on their subrecipients' use of payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds for the duration of the award.
Transfers under sections 602(c)(3) and 603(c)(3) must qualify as an eligible use of Fiscal Recovery Funds by the transferor. Once Fiscal Recovery Funds are received, the transferee must abide by the restrictions on use applicable to the transferor under the ARPA and other applicable law and program guidance. For example, if a county transferred Fiscal Recovery Funds to a town within its borders to respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency, the town would be bound by the eligible use requirements applicable to the county in carrying out the county's goal. This also means that county A may not transfer Fiscal Recovery Funds to county B for use in county B because such a transfer would not, from the perspective of the transferor (county A), be an eligible use in county A.
Section 603(c)(4) separately provides for transfers by a local government to its State or territory. A transfer under section 603(c)(4) will not make the State a subrecipient of the local government, and such Fiscal Recovery Funds may be used by the State for any purpose permitted under section 602(c). A transfer under section 603(c)(4) will result in a cancellation or termination of the award on the part of the transferor local government and a modification of the award to the transferee State or territory. The transferor must provide notice of the transfer to Treasury in a format specified by Treasury. If the local government does not provide such notice, it will remain legally obligated to Treasury under the award and remain responsible for ensuring that the awarded Fiscal Recovery Funds are being used in accordance with the statute and program guidance and for reporting on such uses to Treasury. A State that receives a transfer from a local government under section 603(c)(4) will be bound by all of the use restrictions set forth in section 602(c) with respect to the use of those Fiscal Recovery Funds, including the prohibitions on use of such Fiscal Recovery Funds to offset certain reductions in taxes or to make deposits into pension funds.
The Fiscal Recovery Funds provides for $19.53 billion in payments to be made to States and territories which will distribute the funds to nonentitlement units of local government (NEUs); local governments which generally have populations below 50,000. These local governments have not yet received direct fiscal relief from the Federal Government during the COVID-19 public health emergency, making Fiscal Recovery Funds payments an important source of support for their public health and economic responses. Section 603 requires Treasury to allocate and pay Fiscal Recovery Funds to the States and territories and requires the States and territories to distribute Fiscal Recovery Funds to NEUs based on population within 30 days of receipt unless an extension is granted by the Secretary. The interim final rule clarifies certain aspects regarding the distribution of Fiscal Recovery by States and territories to NEUs, as well as requirements around timely payments from the Fiscal Recovery Funds.
The ARPA requires that States and territories allocate funding to NEUs in an amount that bears the same proportion as the population of the NEU bears to the total population of all NEUs in the State or territory, subject to a cap (described below). Because the statute requires States and territories to make distributions based on population, States and territories may not place additional conditions or requirements on distributions to NEUs, beyond those required by the ARPA and Treasury's implementing regulations and guidance. For example, a State may not impose stricter limitations than permitted by statute or Treasury regulations or guidance on an NEU's use of Fiscal Recovery Funds based on the NEU's proposed spending plan or other policies. States and territories are also not permitted to offset any debt owed by the NEU against the NEU's distribution. Further, States and territories may not provide funding on a reimbursement basis—
Similarly, States and territories distributing Fiscal Recovery Funds payments to NEUs are responsible for complying with the Fiscal Recovery Funds statutory requirement that distributions to NEUs not exceed 75 percent of the NEU's most recent budget. The most recent budget is defined as the NEU's most recent annual total operating budget, including its general fund and other funds, as of January 27, 2020. Amounts in excess of such cap and therefore not distributed to the NEU must be returned to Treasury by the State or territory. States and territories may rely for this determination on a certified top-line budget total from the NEU.
Under the interim final rule, the total allocation and distribution to an NEU, including the sum of both the first and second tranches of funding, cannot exceed the 75 percent cap. States and territories must permit NEUs without formal budgets as of January 27, 2020 to self-certify their most recent annual expenditures as of January 27, 2020 for the purpose of calculating the cap. This approach will provide an administrable means to implement the cap for small local governments that do not adopt a formal budget.
Section 603(b)(3) of the Social Security Act provides for Treasury to make payments to counties but provides that, in the case of an amount to be paid to a county that is not a unit of general local government, the amount shall instead be paid to the State in which such county is located, and such State shall distribute such amount to each unit of general local government within such county in an amount that bears the same proportion to the amount to be paid to such county as the population of such units of general local government bears to the total population of such county. As with NEUs, States may not place additional conditions or requirements on distributions to such units of general local government, beyond those required by the ARPA and Treasury's implementing regulations and guidance.
In the case of consolidated governments, section 603(b)(4) allows consolidated governments (
If necessary, States and territories may use the Fiscal Recovery Funds under section 602(c)(1)(A) to fund expenses related to administering payments to NEUs and units of general local government, as disbursing these funds itself is a response to the public health emergency and its negative economic impacts. If a State or territory requires more time to disburse Fiscal Recovery Funds to NEUs than the allotted 30 days, Treasury will grant extensions of not more than 30 days for States and territories that submit a certification in writing in accordance with section 603(b)(2)(C)(ii)(I). Additional extensions may be granted at the discretion of the Secretary.
States (defined to include the District of Columbia), territories, metropolitan cities, counties, and Tribal governments will be required to submit one interim report and thereafter quarterly Project and Expenditure reports through the end of the award period on December 31, 2026. The interim report will include a recipient's expenditures by category at the summary level from the date of award to July 31, 2021 and, for States and territories, information related to distributions to nonentitlement units. Recipients must submit their interim report to Treasury by August 31, 2021. Nonentitlement units of local government are not required to submit an interim report.
The quarterly Project and Expenditure reports will include financial data, information on contracts and subawards over $50,000, types of projects funded, and other information regarding a recipient's utilization of the award funds. The reports will include the same general data (
Nonentitlement units of local government will be required to submit
States, territories, metropolitan cities, and counties with a population that exceeds 250,000 residents will also be required to submit an annual Recovery Plan Performance report to Treasury. The Recovery Plan Performance report will provide the public and Treasury information on the projects that recipients are undertaking with program funding and how they are planning to ensure project outcomes are achieved in an effective, efficient, and equitable manner. Each jurisdiction will have some flexibility in terms of the form and content of the Recovery Plan Performance report, as long as it includes the minimum information required by Treasury. The Recovery Plan Performance report will include key performance indicators identified by the recipient and some mandatory indicators identified by Treasury, as well as programmatic data in specific eligible use categories and the specific reporting requirements described in the sections above. The initial Recovery Plan Performance report will cover the period from the date of award to July 31, 2021 and must be submitted to Treasury by August 31, 2021. Thereafter, Recovery Plan Performance reports will cover a 12-month period, and recipients will be required to submit the report to Treasury within 30 days after the end of the 12-month period. The second Recovery Plan Performance report will cover the period from July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, and must be submitted to Treasury by July 31, 2022. Each annual Recovery Plan Performance report must be posted on the public-facing website of the recipient. Local governments with fewer than 250,000 residents, Tribal governments, and nonentitlement units of local government are not required to develop a Recovery Plan Performance report.
Treasury will provide additional guidance and instructions on the reporting requirements outlined above for the Fiscal Recovery Funds at a later date.
This interim final rule is being issued without advance notice and public comment to allow for immediate implementation of this program. As discussed below, the requirements of advance notice and public comment do not apply “to the extent that there is involved . . . a matter relating to agency . . . grants.”
These comments must be submitted on or before July 16, 2021.
This interim final rule is economically significant for the purposes of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. Treasury, however, is proceeding under the emergency provision at Executive Order 12866 section 6(a)(3)(D) based on the need to act expeditiously to mitigate the current economic conditions arising from the COVID-19 public health emergency. The rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with Executive Order 12866. This rule is necessary to implement the ARPA in order to provide economic relief to State, local, and Tribal governments adversely impacted by the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Under Executive Order 12866, OMB must determine whether this regulatory action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive Order and subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a significant regulatory action as an action likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to as “economically significant” regulations);
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive order.
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives taking into account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations;
(3) Select, in choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing economic incentives—such as user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired behavior, or providing information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use the best available
Treasury has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action, and is issuing this interim final rule only on a reasoned determination that the benefits exceed the costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, Treasury selected those approaches that would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows and the reasons stated elsewhere in this document, Treasury believes that this interim final rule is consistent with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13563.
Treasury also has determined that this regulatory action does not unduly interfere with States, territories, Tribal governments, and localities in the exercise of their governmental functions.
This Regulatory Impact Analysis discusses the need for regulatory action, the potential benefits, and the potential costs.
This interim final rule is primarily a transfer rule: It transfers $350 billion in aid from the Federal Government to states, territories, Tribal governments, and localities, generating a significant macroeconomic effect on the U.S. economy. In making this transfer, Treasury has sought to implement the program in ways that maximize its potential benefits while minimizing its costs. It has done so by aiming to target relief in key areas according to the congressional mandate; offering clarity to States, territories, Tribal governments, and localities while maintaining their flexibility to respond to local needs; and limiting administrative burdens.
This interim final rule provides benefits across several areas by implementing the four eligible funding uses, as defined in statute: Strengthening the response to the COVID-19 public health emergency and its economic impacts; easing fiscal pressure on State, local, and Tribal governments that might otherwise lead to harmful cutbacks in employment or government services; providing premium pay to essential workers; and making necessary investments in certain types of infrastructure. In implementing the ARPA, Treasury also sought to support disadvantaged communities that have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. The Fiscal Recovery Funds as implemented by the interim final rule can be expected to channel resources toward these uses in order to achieve substantial near-term economic and public health benefits, as well as longer-term benefits arising from the allowable investments in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure and aid to families.
These benefits are achieved in the interim final rule through a broadly flexible approach that sets clear guidelines on eligible uses of Fiscal Recovery Funds and provides State, local, and Tribal government officials discretion within those eligible uses to direct Fiscal Recovery Funds to areas of greatest need within their jurisdiction. While preserving recipients' overall flexibility, the interim final rule includes several provisions that implement statutory requirements and will help support use of Fiscal Recovery Funds to achieve the intended benefits. The remainder of this section clarifies how Treasury's approach to key provisions in the interim final rule will contribute to greater realization of benefits from the program.
•
•
•
•
Finally, the interim final rule aims to promote and streamline the provision of assistance to individuals and communities in greatest need, particularly communities that have been historically disadvantaged and have experienced disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 crisis. Targeting relief is in line with Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” which laid out an Administration-wide priority to support “equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.”
Treasury expects that the administrative burden associated with this program will be moderate for a grant program of its size. Treasury expects that most recipients receive direct or indirect funding from Federal Government programs and that many have familiarity with how to administer and report on Federal funds or grant funding provided by other entities. In particular, States, territories, and large localities will have received funds from the CRF and Treasury expects them to rely heavily on established processes developed last year or through prior grant funding, mitigating burden on these governments.
Treasury expects to provide technical assistance to defray the costs of administration of Fiscal Recovery Funds to further mitigate burden. In making implementation choices, Treasury has hosted numerous consultations with a diverse range of direct recipients—States, small cities, counties, and Tribal governments—along with various communities across the United States, including those that are underserved. Treasury lacks data to estimate the precise extent to which this interim final rule generates administrative burden for State, local, and Tribal governments, but seeks comment to better estimate and account for these costs, as well as on ways to lessen administrative burdens.
Executive Order 13132 (entitled Federalism) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial, direct compliance costs on State, local, and Tribal governments, and is not required by statute, or preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive order. This interim final rule does not have federalism implications within the meaning of the Executive order and does not impose substantial, direct compliance costs on State, local, and Tribal governments or preempt state law within the meaning of the Executive order. The compliance costs are imposed on State, local, and Tribal governments by sections 602 and 603 of the Social Security Act, as enacted by the ARPA. Notwithstanding the above, Treasury has engaged in efforts to consult and work cooperatively with affected State, local, and Tribal government officials and associations in the process of developing the interim final rule. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in section 8(a) of Executive Order 13132, Treasury certifies that it has complied with the requirements of Executive Order 13132.
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551
The APA also provides an exception to ordinary notice-and-comment procedures “when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B);
The Administrator of OIRA has determined that this is a major rule for purposes of Subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996 (also known as the Congressional Review Act or CRA) (5 U.S.C. 804(2)
The information collections associated with State, territory, local, and Tribal government applications materials necessary to receive Fiscal Recovery Funds (
Estimates of hourly burden under this program are set forth in the table below. Burden estimates below are preliminary.
Periodic reporting is required by section 602(c) of Section VI of the Social Security Act and under the interim final rule.
As discussed in Section VIII of this
Nonentitlement unit recipients will be required to submit annual Project and Expenditure reports until the end of the award period. The initial annual Project and Expenditure report for Nonentitlement unit recipients must be submitted to Treasury by October 31, 2021. The subsequent annual reports must be submitted to Treasury by October 31 each year. States, territories, metropolitan cities, and counties with a population that exceeds 250,000 residents will also be required to submit an annual Recovery Plan Performance report to Treasury. The Recovery Plan Performance report will include descriptions of the projects funded and information on the performance indicators and objectives of the award. Each annual Recovery Plan Performance report must be posted on the public-facing website of the recipient. Treasury will provide additional guidance and instructions on the all the reporting requirements outlined above for the Fiscal Recovery Funds program at a later date.
These and related periodic reporting requirements are under consideration and will be submitted to OMB for approval under the PRA emergency provisions in the near future.
Treasury invites comments on all aspects of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements including: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Comments should be sent by the comment deadline to the
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that when an agency issues a proposed rule, or a final rule pursuant to section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act or another law, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis that meets the requirements of the RFA and publish such analysis in the
Rules that are exempt from notice and comment under the APA are also exempt from the RFA requirements, including the requirement to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis, when among other things the agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. Since this rule is exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the APA, Treasury is not required to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Executive compensation, Public health emergency, State and local governments, Tribal governments.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the Treasury amends 31 CFR part 35 as follows:
42 U.S.C. 802(f); 42 U.S.C. 803(f); 31 U.S.C. 321; Division N, Title V, Subtitle B, Pub. L. 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182; Section 104A, Pub. L. 103-325, 108 Stat. 2160, as amended (12 U.S.C. 4701
This subpart implements section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act (Subtitle M of Title IX of Pub. L. 117-2), which amends Title VI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 801
This subpart applies to States, territories, Tribal governments, metropolitan cities, nonentitlement units of local government, counties, and units of general local government that accept a payment or transfer of funds made under section 602 or 603 of the Social Security Act.
As used in this subpart:
(1) Begins on March 3, 2021; and
(2) Ends on the last day of the fiscal year of such State, Territory, or Tribal government in which all funds received by the State, Territory, or Tribal government from a payment made under section 602 or 603 of the Social Security Act have been expended or returned to, or recovered by, the Secretary.
(1) With respect to a recipient that is a metropolitan city, nonentitlement unit of local government, or county, workers in any additional sectors as each chief executive officer of such recipient may designate as critical to protect the health and well-being of the residents of their metropolitan city, nonentitlement unit of local government, or county; or
(2) With respect to a State, Territory, or Tribal government, workers in any additional sectors as each Governor of a State or Territory, or each Tribal government, may designate as critical to protect the health and well-being of the residents of their State, Territory, or Tribal government.
(1) Is not performed while teleworking from a residence; and
(2) Involves:
(i) Regular in-person interactions with patients, the public, or coworkers of the individual that is performing the work; or
(ii) Regular physical handling of items that were handled by, or are to be handled by patients, the public, or coworkers of the individual that is performing the work.
(1) With regard to work that the eligible worker previously performed, pay and remuneration equal to the sum of all wages and remuneration previously received plus up to $13 per hour with no reduction, substitution, offset, or other diminishment of the eligible worker's previous, current, or prospective wages or remuneration; or
(2) With regard to work that the eligible worker continues to perform, pay of up to $13 that is in addition to the eligible worker's regular rate of wages or remuneration, with no reduction, substitution, offset, or other diminishment of the workers' current and prospective wages or remuneration.
(1) Has no more than 500 employees, or if applicable, the size standard in number of employees established by the Administrator of the Small Business Administration for the industry in which the business concern or organization operates; and
(2) Is a small business concern as defined in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632).
(1) That is wholly owned by one or more Tribal governments, or by a corporation that is wholly owned by one or more Tribal governments; or
(2) That is owned in part by one or more Tribal governments, or by a corporation that is wholly owned by one or more Tribal governments, if all other owners are either United States citizens or small business concerns, as these terms are used and consistent with the definitions in 15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(D).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(a)
(b)
(1)
(i) Expenses related to COVID-19 vaccination programs and sites, including staffing, acquisition of equipment or supplies, facilities costs, and information technology or other administrative expenses;
(ii) COVID-19-related expenses of public hospitals, clinics, and similar facilities;
(iii) COVID-19 related expenses in congregate living facilities, including skilled nursing facilities, long-term care facilities, incarceration settings, homeless shelters, residential foster care facilities, residential behavioral health treatment, and other group living facilities;
(iv) Expenses of establishing temporary public medical facilities and other measures to increase COVID-19 treatment capacity, including related construction costs and other capital investments in public facilities to meet COVID-19-related operational needs;
(v) Expenses of establishing temporary public medical facilities and other measures to increase COVID-19 treatment capacity, including related construction costs and other capital investments in public facilities to meet COVID-19-related operational needs;
(vi) Costs of providing COVID-19 testing and monitoring, contact tracing, and monitoring of case trends and genomic sequencing for variants;
(vii) Emergency medical response expenses, including emergency medical transportation, related to COVID-19;
(viii) Expenses for establishing and operating public telemedicine capabilities for COVID-19-related treatment;
(ix) Expenses for communication related to COVID-19 vaccination programs and communication or enforcement by recipients of public health orders related to COVID-19;
(x) Expenses for acquisition and distribution of medical and protective supplies, including sanitizing products and personal protective equipment;
(xi) Expenses for disinfection of public areas and other facilities in
(xii) Expenses for technical assistance to local authorities or other entities on mitigation of COVID-19-related threats to public health and safety;
(xiii) Expenses for quarantining or isolation of individuals;
(xiv) Expenses of providing paid sick and paid family and medical leave to public employees to enable compliance with COVID-19 public health precautions;
(xv) Expenses for treatment of the long-term symptoms or effects of COVID-19, including post-intensive care syndrome;
(xvi) Expenses for the improvement of ventilation systems in congregate settings, public health facilities, or other public facilities;
(xvii) Expenses related to establishing or enhancing public health data systems; and
(xviii) Mental health treatment, substance misuse treatment, and other behavioral health services.
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(i) Programs or services that facilitate access to health and social services, including:
(A) Assistance accessing or applying for public benefits or services;
(B) Remediation of lead paint or other lead hazards; and
(C) Community violence intervention programs;
(ii) Programs or services that address housing insecurity, lack of affordable housing, or homelessness, including:
(A) Supportive housing or other programs or services to improve access to stable, affordable housing among individuals who are homeless;
(B) Development of affordable housing to increase supply of affordable and high-quality living units; and
(C) Housing vouchers and assistance relocating to neighborhoods with higher levels of economic opportunity and to reduce concentrated areas of low economic opportunity;
(iii) Programs or services that address or mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency on education, including:
(A) New or expanded early learning services;
(B) Assistance to high-poverty school districts to advance equitable funding across districts and geographies; and
(C) Educational and evidence-based services to address the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of students; and
(iv) Programs or services that address or mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency on childhood health or welfare, including:
(A) New or expanded childcare;
(B) Programs to provide home visits by health professionals, parent educators, and social service professionals to individuals with young children to provide education and assistance for economic support, health needs, or child development; and
(C) Services for child welfare-involved families and foster youth to provide support and education on child development, positive parenting, coping skills, or recovery for mental health and substance use.
(c)
(d)
(1)
(2)
(e)
(1)
(2)
(i) Reliably meet or exceed symmetrical 100 Mbps download speed and upload speeds; or
(ii) In cases where it is not practicable, because of the excessive cost of the project or geography or topography of the area to be served by the project, to provide service meeting the standards set forth in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section:
(A) Reliably meet or exceed 100 Mbps download speed and between at least 20 Mbps and 100 Mbps upload speed; and
(B) Be scalable to a minimum of 100 Mbps download speed and 100 Mbps upload speed.
A recipient may not use funds for deposit into any pension fund.
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(i) The aggregate amount of the expected increases in tax revenue caused by one or more covered changes that, either based on a reasonable statistical methodology to isolate the impact of the covered change in actual revenue or based on projections that use reasonable assumptions and do not incorporate the effects of macroeconomic growth to reduce or increase the projected impact of the covered change, the State or Territory assesses has had or predicts to have the effect of increasing tax revenue; and
(ii) Reductions in spending, up to the amount of the State's or Territory's net reduction in total spending, that are in:
(A) Departments, agencies, or authorities in which the State or Territory is not using funds; and
(B) Departments, agencies, or authorities in which the State or Territory is using funds, in an amount equal to the value of the spending cuts in those departments, agencies, or authorities, minus funds used.
(c)
(1) The reduction in net tax revenue of the State or Territory for the reporting year, measured as the difference between the State's or Territory's baseline and its actual tax revenue, each measured as of the end of the reporting year; and,
(2) The aggregate amount of the reductions in tax revenues caused by covered changes identified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, minus the sum of the amounts in identified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and (ii).
A recipient must comply with all other applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and Executive orders, and a recipient shall provide for compliance with the American Rescue Plan Act, this subpart, and any interpretive guidance by other parties in any agreements it enters into with other parties relating to these funds.
(a)
(2)
(b)
(2)
(i) The amount set forth in § 35.8(c); and,
(ii) The amount of funds received by such recipient.
(c)
(d)
(1) An explanation of why the recipient believes all or some of the amount should not be subject to recoupment; and
(2) A discussion of supporting reasons, along with any additional information.
(e)
(f)
(1) Within 120 calendar days of receipt of the notice of recoupment provided under paragraph (c) of this section, in the case of a recipient that does not submit a request for reconsideration in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section; or
(2) Within 120 calendar days of receipt of the Secretary's decision under paragraph (e) of this section, in the case of a recipient that submits a request for reconsideration in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.
(a)
(b)
(1) A certification, in the form provided by the Secretary, that such State or Territory requires the payment to carry out the activities specified in section 602(c) of the Social Security Act and will use the payment in compliance with section 602(c) of the Social Security Act; and,
(2) Any reports required to be filed by that date pursuant to this subpart that have not yet been filed.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)